FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Masks don’t work
Masks don’t work
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Is it March 2020?" 
He's just trekking through his old social media pages  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " Or... 'Go look up' the published research evidence that demonstrates their effectiveness OP. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " Wow... Seriously this is a wind up? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " Do tin foil hats work? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Do tin foil hats work? " Apparently not  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Do tin foil hats work? " Only if you use it shiny side up  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " https://youtu.be/DNeYfUTA11s Or maybe they do | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Do tin foil hats work? " For baking fish in yes they do!!!! T | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Do tin foil hats work? " I was thinking of black sacked stand in one then one over the head tape it up in the middle. Covid will never get in. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Is it March 2020?" No Because in March 2020 there were numerous posts about the study that proves the effectiveness of face coverings. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " OK, next. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " The large flaw in this logic is that the virus particles need a medium to travel in. This medium is generally moisture droplets, which masks are pretty effective in stopping. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " Erm: my understanding is that Omicron, unlike Delta, targets our upper tract and NOT our lower tract (lungs)...hence milder symptoms??? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Is it March 2020?
He's just trekking through his old social media pages "looks like it lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Erm: my understanding is that Omicron, unlike Delta, targets our upper tract and NOT our lower tract (lungs)...hence milder symptoms??? "It seems to me that covid can attack multiple organs and areas of the body regardless of variant I personally think it varies form person to person dependent on how good their immune response is, I could be wrong obviously which is fine, but my brother who probably contracted the delta variant when he had covid last year has been left with heart problems that he didn't have before (palpitations and prolonged spikes in heart rate) which he is now seeing a long covid clinic for as they belive it has been caused by the virus | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even the cdc are saying that cloth masks don’t work" Citation needed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Erm: my understanding is that Omicron, unlike Delta, targets our upper tract and NOT our lower tract (lungs)...hence milder symptoms???
It seems to me that covid can attack multiple organs and areas of the body regardless of variant I personally think it varies form person to person dependent on how good their immune response is, I could be wrong obviously which is fine, but my brother who probably contracted the delta variant when he had covid last year has been left with heart problems that he didn't have before (palpitations and prolonged spikes in heart rate) which he is now seeing a long covid clinic for as they belive it has been caused by the virus "You are wrong so glad you are fine with this... Google "omicron upper respiratory"... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " And you go and research Brownian Motion - And then go research the fact that the covid virus attaches itself to water droplets in order to flow in free air. Then search 'Cloth masks are a worthy line of defense to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic'. So. Size - in this - case mostly doesn't matter. Regardless of what intuitive thinking may have you first believe.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " Go and look up the size of a droplet of fluid in which the virus travels. Go and look up the studies that show that mask wearing reduces transmission. Try to just be nice and think about, even the potential, of reducing someone else's risk of serious illness rather than your inconvenience. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even the cdc are now saying cloth and surgical masks have very limited effectiveness and are now recommending n95 masks instead. For anyone that bothered look look at the published literature on the subject 2 years ago ago this was glaring obvious. " Nope. The CDC say that cloth masks are the least effective of those available. Significantly more effective than no mask. So you are saying that we should all wear N95 masks, right? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Least come thursday they will not b mandatory! Thank fuck for that! X" At least come Thursday we can look forward to an increase in spread, bit as long as it takes the pressure of BoJo, who cares? For the sake of a couple of more weeks to get over the local infection spikes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Least come thursday they will not b mandatory! Thank fuck for that! X At least come Thursday we can look forward to an increase in spread, bit as long as it takes the pressure of BoJo, who cares? For the sake of a couple of more weeks to get over the local infection spikes." Do you believe an increase in covid cases will happen after the restrictions are lifted? If so why do you think that uplift will happen now after a long period of high covid infections? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Least come thursday they will not b mandatory! Thank fuck for that! X At least come Thursday we can look forward to an increase in spread, bit as long as it takes the pressure of BoJo, who cares? For the sake of a couple of more weeks to get over the local infection spikes. Do you believe an increase in covid cases will happen after the restrictions are lifted? If so why do you think that uplift will happen now after a long period of high covid infections?" Less homeworking, more mixing on public transport, less mask wearing to reduce transmission a bit. Etc. Happy to be proven wrong though! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even the cdc are saying that cloth masks don’t work Citation needed. " They don't trust anything else the CDC says, but this, is gospel. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Least come thursday they will not b mandatory! Thank fuck for that! X At least come Thursday we can look forward to an increase in spread, bit as long as it takes the pressure of BoJo, who cares? For the sake of a couple of more weeks to get over the local infection spikes. Do you believe an increase in covid cases will happen after the restrictions are lifted? If so why do you think that uplift will happen now after a long period of high covid infections? Less homeworking, more mixing on public transport, less mask wearing to reduce transmission a bit. Etc. Happy to be proven wrong though!" I see those reasons but I also see recent covid daily cases at 150K + and one estimate of 4.5 million people in the UK having covid a few weeks ago. If those numbers are correct, vaccine programme doing well and more historic covid immunity numbers, how can it get worse? I'm starting to feel we can't get to zero, just yet but it cant get worse than it has been, am I alone in this thinking? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Least come thursday they will not b mandatory! Thank fuck for that! X At least come Thursday we can look forward to an increase in spread, bit as long as it takes the pressure of BoJo, who cares? Nothing like a bit of positivity ehh ? For the sake of a couple of more weeks to get over the local infection spikes." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even the cdc are saying that cloth masks don’t work Citation needed. They don't trust anything else the CDC says, but this, is gospel. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's astonishing seeing certain social media bollocks still being believed. Just wear a bloody mask if you can. It's not hard." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks don’t work and il never wear one … any one that thinks they do are deluded and love being governed “lock me down harder daddy” " Oh dear. Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks don’t work and il never wear one … any one that thinks they do are deluded and love being governed “lock me down harder daddy” Oh dear. Winston" Here’s one now … right on cue  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " Nobody has ever thought masks on there own stop spread but used alongside social distancing and that massive imposition of washing hands can reduce spread. It's no individual acts, it's the sum of their parts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks don’t work and il never wear one … any one that thinks they do are deluded and love being governed “lock me down harder daddy” Oh dear. Winston Here’s one now … right on cue "Why don't masks work? Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks don’t work and il never wear one … any one that thinks they do are deluded and love being governed “lock me down harder daddy” " Anyone else just think of the David Brent gif? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Least come thursday they will not b mandatory! Thank fuck for that! X At least come Thursday we can look forward to an increase in spread, but as long as it takes the pressure of BoJo, who cares? Nothing like a bit of positivity ehh ? For the sake of a couple of more weeks to get over the local infection spikes." Virus' don't really care how positive you are. Really no harm in a couple of more weeks to allow everywhere to level off before relaxing precautions is there? Why do the hard work and screw it up at the end. However, what's a few more people in hospital and the odd death if it improves our Prime Minister's approval numbers... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks don’t work and il never wear one … any one that thinks they do are deluded and love being governed “lock me down harder daddy” " To be fair FFP3 are excellent (99% effective) are not as good as surgical masks( but are still 80-90%). Factors such as amount of virus at exposure, length of exposure and what mitigation factors are present( HEPA filters/ ventilation) all play a come into play when assessing risk. Good luck, your young, but you could still get long covid | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks have always been of limited effectiveness (standfast FFP2/3 masks which are very effective). It’s not just about the mask - it’s about how clean the mask is (I’ll bet most have never been washed) and how clean your hands are when the mask goes on / comes off. Non FFP2/3 masks, in study populations with clean masks and good technique, are of marginal benefit. Masks in real world usage are almost certainly of less benefit than this. " Ewww! Mine gets washed daily! Hopefully b last wearing at work tomoz as not in then till thurs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks have always been of limited effectiveness (standfast FFP2/3 masks which are very effective). It’s not just about the mask - it’s about how clean the mask is (I’ll bet most have never been washed) and how clean your hands are when the mask goes on / comes off. Non FFP2/3 masks, in study populations with clean masks and good technique, are of marginal benefit. Masks in real world usage are almost certainly of less benefit than this. Ewww! Mine gets washed daily! Hopefully b last wearing at work tomoz as not in then till thurs x" I have six and cycle through them. Lot's of colours for sartorial coordination too  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Erm: my understanding is that Omicron, unlike Delta, targets our upper tract and NOT our lower tract (lungs)...hence milder symptoms??? "Yes this is true. Replicates 70 times more in the upper airways, and far less now in the lungs, which is why it's being deemed milder and also why its more transmissable, which we've seen with much less need for ventilators for even those that are hospitalised. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel." This. A nice big dose of common bloody sense! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought, perhaps erroneously, that in order to travel around and transmit, the virus ‘attached’ itself to other particles that were far bigger than themselves. It is the bigger particles that find it hard to navigate through the mask this hindering the viruses progress and helping to reduce its spread, but not completely. No doubt a more technically aware person will put me straight. " You’re correct. The Covid-19 virons (virus particles) are airborne in the sense they are transmitted in droplets of water when an infected person exhales. Masks offer the wearer some protection from inhaling these. Obviously, masks are available in degrees of quality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought, perhaps erroneously, that in order to travel around and transmit, the virus ‘attached’ itself to other particles that were far bigger than themselves. It is the bigger particles that find it hard to navigate through the mask this hindering the viruses progress and helping to reduce its spread, but not completely. No doubt a more technically aware person will put me straight. You’re correct. The Covid-19 virons (virus particles) are airborne in the sense they are transmitted in droplets of water when an infected person exhales. Masks offer the wearer some protection from inhaling these. Obviously, masks are available in degrees of quality. " Moreover there is a direct correlation between initial viral load and disease severity. So the less virus you are exposed to, the less severe your symptoms and your chances of a better outcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel." This^^^ xx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx"Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha "No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down. There is not free-floating virus. Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down.
There is not free-floating virus.
Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation?"What don’t you understand about an AIRBOURNE virus … paaahahahaa | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Easyuk you’ve made my day… a two year long pandemic and you still don’t know what an airborne virus is … well done kudos to you my friend lol " I think that you are, perhaps, a bit confused. The majority of virus is expired in droplets. Some in aerosol. Both are reduced or prevented even with a cloth mask.The advice was always to wear a multi-layer cloth mask. So, you you help others significantly in doing so. If you are only worried about yourself, then a cloth mask is helpful, but better fitting and filtering levels will improve that. As Omicron appears to generate higher virus levels higher filtration would be needed to reduce transmission more effectively, but acloth mask is still better than no mask. You can look this up, but I guess you will not believe anything that does not agree with your view. It clearly isn't possible to explain further if you are figuratively covering your ears and going "la la la la la". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down.
There is not free-floating virus.
Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation?
What don’t you understand about an AIRBOURNE virus … paaahahahaa "From WebMD: How Airborne Transmission Works. Airborne diseases are bacteria or viruses that are most commonly transmitted through small respiratory droplets. These droplets are expelled when someone with the airborne disease sneezes, coughs, laughs, or otherwise exhales in some way. These infectious vehicles can travel along air currents, linger in the air, or cling to surfaces, where they are eventually inhaled by someone else. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down.
There is not free-floating virus.
Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation?
What don’t you understand about an AIRBOURNE virus … paaahahahaa
From WebMD:
How Airborne Transmission Works.
Airborne diseases are bacteria or viruses that are most commonly transmitted through small respiratory droplets. These droplets are expelled when someone with the airborne disease sneezes, coughs, laughs, or otherwise exhales in some way. These infectious vehicles can travel along air currents, linger in the air, or cling to surfaces, where they are eventually inhaled by someone else. "Exactly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down.
There is not free-floating virus.
Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation?
What don’t you understand about an AIRBOURNE virus … paaahahahaa
From WebMD:
How Airborne Transmission Works.
Airborne diseases are bacteria or viruses that are most commonly transmitted through small respiratory droplets. These droplets are expelled when someone with the airborne disease sneezes, coughs, laughs, or otherwise exhales in some way. These infectious vehicles can travel along air currents, linger in the air, or cling to surfaces, where they are eventually inhaled by someone else.
Exactly "Yes, exactly. Droplets. I'm happy that it all makes sense now | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. " People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down.
There is not free-floating virus.
Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation?
What don’t you understand about an AIRBOURNE virus … paaahahahaa
From WebMD:
How Airborne Transmission Works.
Airborne diseases are bacteria or viruses that are most commonly transmitted through small respiratory droplets. These droplets are expelled when someone with the airborne disease sneezes, coughs, laughs, or otherwise exhales in some way. These infectious vehicles can travel along air currents, linger in the air, or cling to surfaces, where they are eventually inhaled by someone else.
Exactly "Exactly - the viral particles become airborne via respiratory droplets sneezed, coughed etc out of human noses and mouths. If we minimise the droplets getting into the air, we minimise transmission of the virus. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. " You have just said something that is not true. It's already been posted on here. Masks are one of a range of measures to reduce transmission and hence severe illness and death in the population. This they do and are evidenced as such. They are not expected to "prevent viral infection". The reuse of masks is, indeed, not hygienic without washing in-between. Nobody is advised to do that. Quite the opposite. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. " Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. " Actually anyone with a modicum of medical or scientific knowledge that's kept up on events in the last 2 years should be aware of the studies carried out a long time before covid, in fact one such study titled "Face Mask Use and Control of Respiratory Virus Transmission in Households" dates from around 10 years before covid. The following is an extract from the conclusions of one particular study "For new or emerging respiratory virus infections, no pharmaceutical interventions may be available. Even with seasonal influenza, widespread oseltamivir resistance in influenza virus A (H1N1) strains have recently been reported (32). Masks may therefore play an important role in reducing transmission." Maybe some people need to take a step back from social media cut and paste and read some real life facts ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
No. the virus is in fluid droplets. They are contained by your mask or fall to the floor once slowed down.
There is not free-floating virus.
Do you understand this, or does it require further explanation?
What don’t you understand about an AIRBOURNE virus … paaahahahaa "Seems they understands a lot more about an air born virus than you fella! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it's pretty obvious by now that masks have had sod-all impact on transmission. A lot of people just don't want to admit it. They've become a comfort blanket or a political symbol for some. No one ever talks about the huge environmental impact of all these disposable masks either. " will soon find out of masks have had sod all impact when the restrictions in England get dropped. No idea how you came to your conclusion at this juncture. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. " a fake virus? So all the dead folk are just hiding? Good to know. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. " Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre?" Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha "I'll say this slowly........ The virus particles don't float around on their own in the air. They need a carrier, or mode of transport. That carrier is the droplets of wet stuff that comes out of your nose and mouth. Those droplets are too large to pass through a face mask. Even if you don't understand the science, surely you understand the common sense? Breathe into your hand, you feel the breath on your hand. Put on a mask and do the same. No breath on your hand. Don't understand the science, but understand the common sense. I've sneezed wearing a mask. The inside was soaking wet, the outside was bone dry. Don't understand the science, but understand the common sense. At the beginning of the outbreak cases rising exponentially and out of control. After the mask mandate, cases rising at a manageable level and much much slower. Don't understand the science, but understand the common sense. As you rightly say, 2 years and still some people don't understand. Some people are willfully, beligerantly and deliberately ignorant. Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses." Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. " Let me think on that one The web is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of a virus that doesn't exist because a conspiracy theorist says so ? Bedtime ...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Let me think on that one The web is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of a virus that doesn't exist because a conspiracy theorist says so ? Bedtime ......" Nope, because for the time being we have freedom of speech. You believe in what you hear and get told and I believe in what I hear and get told. Its ok for all the self proclaimed news watchers to preach their views so I can preach mine. Without tin hat, conspiracy name calling. We're all equal and all should all be allowed so say what belive. Somehow people think they have the right to belittle people who don't agree with what they say. Real bad times. Very very sad. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Let me think on that one The web is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of a virus that doesn't exist because a conspiracy theorist says so ? Bedtime ...... Nope, because for the time being we have freedom of speech. You believe in what you hear and get told and I believe in what I hear and get told. Its ok for all the self proclaimed news watchers to preach their views so I can preach mine. Without tin hat, conspiracy name calling. We're all equal and all should all be allowed so say what belive. Somehow people think they have the right to belittle people who don't agree with what they say. Real bad times. Very very sad. " Freedom of speech comes with responsibilities and consequences, and being completely Frank when a person or persons are deliberately spreading disinformation especially in a global health crisis that has to be corrected.. It's a bit like someone for some unimaginable reason sending people away from an exit in a fire because they think it's ok.. It ain't.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Let me think on that one The web is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of a virus that doesn't exist because a conspiracy theorist says so ? Bedtime ...... Nope, because for the time being we have freedom of speech. You believe in what you hear and get told and I believe in what I hear and get told. Its ok for all the self proclaimed news watchers to preach their views so I can preach mine. Without tin hat, conspiracy name calling. We're all equal and all should all be allowed so say what belive. Somehow people think they have the right to belittle people who don't agree with what they say. Real bad times. Very very sad. " An opinion of an anti vaxxer who gets their information from social media is not equal to the opinion of an experienced medical expert. If I want to build a bridge you're damn sure I will trust the structural engineer more than the cave man who says otherwise just because he fears technology. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Let me think on that one The web is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of a virus that doesn't exist because a conspiracy theorist says so ? Bedtime ...... Nope, because for the time being we have freedom of speech. You believe in what you hear and get told and I believe in what I hear and get told. Its ok for all the self proclaimed news watchers to preach their views so I can preach mine. Without tin hat, conspiracy name calling. We're all equal and all should all be allowed so say what belive. Somehow people think they have the right to belittle people who don't agree with what they say. Real bad times. Very very sad. " This is fantastic news. I'll let the 3 people I know who lost their lives to covid that it's a fake virus and they're not really dead. Fake virus? How frankly ridiculous. Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. OK, just a little food for thought. What about the 100k NHS workers who are unvaxed and likely to loose their jobs? Front line workers, I'd say they're pretty well versed in what's happened and what is happening. This super shocking super deadly virus that kills hundreds of thousands of people. Yet why don't they want the vax? Aren't they scared for their lives working first hand with the super ill and infected? Remember how terribly contagious it is. Are they hell, average age of death 82.7.... Average age of living 83 for females 79 for men. It's ok to admit you've all been tricked into taking a vaxine that does nothing. It's amazing what they've done, like super clever. The divide is real but bullying people and name calling is just vile. It's playground antics. A thread I read on here the other day. A bloke spoke about something that didn't fit in with the vaccine narrative and a lady posted they should all delete him she'll go first. I mean come on, how childish is that. We're all adults and going on like children. I've never in my life seen or heard anything like this since primary school. Who cares what other believe. Just crack on and do what you think is right. Let me think on that one The web is full of conspiracy theories about the origin of a virus that doesn't exist because a conspiracy theorist says so ? Bedtime ...... Nope, because for the time being we have freedom of speech. You believe in what you hear and get told and I believe in what I hear and get told. Its ok for all the self proclaimed news watchers to preach their views so I can preach mine. Without tin hat, conspiracy name calling. We're all equal and all should all be allowed so say what belive. Somehow people think they have the right to belittle people who don't agree with what they say. Real bad times. Very very sad. An opinion of an anti vaxxer who gets their information from social media is not equal to the opinion of an experienced medical expert. If I want to build a bridge you're damn sure I will trust the structural engineer more than the cave man who says otherwise just because he fears technology." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon." The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. " No. Stating advice and information from knowledgeable scientists, medical staff and public health professionals do not make the people repeating it experts or scientists. They do not need to be because they are not making anything up themselves or reinterpreting anything. They are just repeating what actual scientists have advised. Two years in and significantly fewer people are getting severely ill and dying. This reduction coincided with lockdowns and then vaccinations. Not a fake virus, but certainly some brainwashing of a minority it would seem. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence." My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Here is a video of Fauci saying no one should be wearing masks and they don't provide the level of protection people think they do. https://youtu.be/PRa6t_e7dgI" ...and here are the reasons why advice changes as explained previously: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-fauci-outdated-video-masks-idUSKBN26T2TR https://edition.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_e58c20c6-8735-4022-a1f5-1580bc732c45 Timing and context are really very important. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence." No | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Here is a video of Fauci saying no one should be wearing masks and they don't provide the level of protection people think they do. https://youtu.be/PRa6t_e7dgI" Isnt Fauci the dude that we are told is a puppet of big pharma and not a word should be trusted? Your inconsistency is consistent Alpha variant changed to Delta which was much more transmissible and as science and understanding evolves so does methods to address illnes. Here's what he said when explaining the change in advice ... “We didn’t realize the extent of asymptotic spread…what happened as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth…so that took care of that problem. Secondly, we fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection. So it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently.” In addition The WHO changed its mask recommendation in June 2020. In July 2020 the CDC said, “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.” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Here is a video of Fauci saying no one should be wearing masks and they don't provide the level of protection people think they do. https://youtu.be/PRa6t_e7dgI Isnt Fauci the dude that we are told is a puppet of big pharma and not a word should be trusted? Your inconsistency is consistent Alpha variant changed to Delta which was much more transmissible and as science and understanding evolves so does methods to address illnes. Here's what he said when explaining the change in advice ... “We didn’t realize the extent of asymptotic spread…what happened as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth…so that took care of that problem. Secondly, we fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection. So it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently.” In addition The WHO changed its mask recommendation in June 2020. In July 2020 the CDC said, “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.” " I've never met one person who treats their face mask being disposable or multi use, use their mask in correct manner. Not one. Ever. And I meet hundreds of people daily due to my work. Not a single one person. Especially when I ask if they wash their hands after they handle their face covering. Not a single person ive met washes their hands after taking it off or putting it back on (which is what you're not supposed to do in the first place). Not one person I've met in real life takes the recommended appropriate steps you must do to reduce the spread or keep yourself safe. Not one human being. And I meet 200-300 human beings every single day. For some magical reason general public are convinced that masks are supposed to protect them and not the other way around. I wonder why is this happening. P.S. we both wear masks to make other people feel better when we're at work and because we have to do that to keep our jobs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Erm: my understanding is that Omicron, unlike Delta, targets our upper tract and NOT our lower tract (lungs)...hence milder symptoms???
It seems to me that covid can attack multiple organs and areas of the body regardless of variant I personally think it varies form person to person dependent on how good their immune response is, I could be wrong obviously which is fine, but my brother who probably contracted the delta variant when he had covid last year has been left with heart problems that he didn't have before (palpitations and prolonged spikes in heart rate) which he is now seeing a long covid clinic for as they belive it has been caused by the virus "Out of interest was your brother vaccinated? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In the studies cloth masks especially are an infection risk because they get damp and contaminated so quickly. These are studies on medical professionals who are trained in proper fitting and timely disposal of masks. The general public are literally unrolling the same mask from their pocket they were probably wearing the say before. It's completely absurd quite unhygienic. " Do you have some links to scientific journal articles or other scholarly information about the disease ridden cloth masks? The only place I've read (absolute nonsense) about masks giving you lung infection and suchlike has been on the fruit-loopery websites my mother peruses. My mother, for the record, is not sane. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Here is a video of Fauci saying no one should be wearing masks and they don't provide the level of protection people think they do. https://youtu.be/PRa6t_e7dgI Isnt Fauci the dude that we are told is a puppet of big pharma and not a word should be trusted? Your inconsistency is consistent Alpha variant changed to Delta which was much more transmissible and as science and understanding evolves so does methods to address illnes. Here's what he said when explaining the change in advice ... “We didn’t realize the extent of asymptotic spread…what happened as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth…so that took care of that problem. Secondly, we fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection. So it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently.” In addition The WHO changed its mask recommendation in June 2020. In July 2020 the CDC said, “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.” " Didn't Fauci say "in all the history of respiratory viruses a symptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks" funny how all histories understanding of viral transmission changed over night. The WHO also said the same and two research papers (one of 10million subjects in Wuhan) showed asymptomatic transmission of corona virus amongst close contacts just doesn't happen. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. No" No? To what? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer." If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19?" I was always under the impression that wearing the mask was to protect others and not for the wearers protection | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? I was always under the impression that wearing the mask was to protect others and not for the wearers protection " There's probably a lot you're under the impression of if you just listen to Dr Hillary | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? I was always under the impression that wearing the mask was to protect others and not for the wearers protection There's probably a lot you're under the impression of if you just listen to Dr Hillary "you could be correct! Yet you have said that covid is not a serious illness, that lockdowns and restrictions were ineffective, that the figures are wrong on deaths, that the vaccine is ineffective yet highlight deaths from it, you have said that masks do not work. There seems to be a common thread in that you have disagreed with every single thing on covid | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there still seems to be a lot of b%$#*cks being talked òn both sides here? Surgeons wear masks so there is generally a less chance of infection? The quality of mask could obviously be relevant? I for one hate them but grin and bear for self preservation reasons. I think the whole situation has been badly handled throughout because of political pressures but we are where we are so all we can do is mourn our dead and try to use common sense rather than be swayed by scare mongering rubbish propagated by social media People clearly have too much time on their hands if they spend that much time on such inconsequential rubbish?" Come thurs will b irelivent can choose weather or not we want to continue to wear them x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In the studies cloth masks especially are an infection risk because they get damp and contaminated so quickly. These are studies on medical professionals who are trained in proper fitting and timely disposal of masks. The general public are literally unrolling the same mask from their pocket they were probably wearing the say before. It's completely absurd quite unhygienic. " New complaint then? Rolling argument to find some sort of a problem. If people are refusing masks then they are not following the guidance, are they? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Imagine wearing a mask to stop transmission of a virus you haven't got. Madness If humanity needed masks to survive viruses we'd have evolved them and look like The Predator. I'll stick to my innate defences and immune system. My freedoms doesn't end where the sheets fear begins." This is completely incoherent. People catch and die of respiratory diseases. People catch and die of diseases transmitted through droplets and aerosol sprays transmitted through the air. We have evolved nasal hair, mucus, cilia in our respiratory tracts and tonsils amongst other things to reduce infection through these paths. As an animal capable of learning to overcome our physical limitations we can also learn to wear masks. It's a bit like making fire. We don't shoot it out of our fingers and are not likely to evolve the ability to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19?" After two years are you still not aware of the fact that mask wearing is primarily to prevent you from spreading the disease to other people? The advice has always been to wear a well fitted N95 to protect yourself and medical staff wear even more substantial face coverings in high risk situations. You have seen the photos of their faces after a shift, haven't you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Here is a video of Fauci saying no one should be wearing masks and they don't provide the level of protection people think they do. https://youtu.be/PRa6t_e7dgI Isnt Fauci the dude that we are told is a puppet of big pharma and not a word should be trusted? Your inconsistency is consistent Alpha variant changed to Delta which was much more transmissible and as science and understanding evolves so does methods to address illnes. Here's what he said when explaining the change in advice ... “We didn’t realize the extent of asymptotic spread…what happened as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth…so that took care of that problem. Secondly, we fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection. So it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently.” In addition The WHO changed its mask recommendation in June 2020. In July 2020 the CDC said, “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.” Didn't Fauci say "in all the history of respiratory viruses a symptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks" funny how all histories understanding of viral transmission changed over night. The WHO also said the same and two research papers (one of 10million subjects in Wuhan) showed asymptomatic transmission of corona virus amongst close contacts just doesn't happen." You have contradicted yourself then. The point is that the advice on mask wearing changed when it became clear that ASYMPTOMATIC transmission was far more widespread that previously known. Funny how you only read what you want. From the BMJ analysis of the Wuhan study: "The researchers said that their findings did not show that the virus couldn’t be passed on by asymptomatic carriers, and they didn’t suggest that their findings were generalisable." You read "thousands of papers" as a "medicinal chemist", eh? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Put a mask on and blow onto your hand. Now take the mask off and blow onto your hand. Which did you feel more? Without any other science needed that should show that it must reduce the spread of the virus as its reducing the distance air can travel. This^^^ xx
Hahaha what a load of rubbish the particles are so tiny they float in the air for as long as the wind or the air in the room will take them … I absolutely have no words to describe the ridiculousness of you comment … a COVID particle 10000 times smaller than the tiniest spec of dust and you think it will just drop to the floor because your wearing a mask ?? Paaaaa hhahahahaha
I'll say this slowly........
The virus particles don't float around on their own in the air.
They need a carrier, or mode of transport.
That carrier is the droplets of wet stuff that comes out of your nose and mouth.
Those droplets are too large to pass through a face mask.
Even if you don't understand the science, surely you understand the common sense?
Breathe into your hand, you feel the breath on your hand. Put on a mask and do the same. No breath on your hand. Don't understand the science, but understand the common sense.
I've sneezed wearing a mask. The inside was soaking wet, the outside was bone dry. Don't understand the science, but understand the common sense.
At the beginning of the outbreak cases rising exponentially and out of control. After the mask mandate, cases rising at a manageable level and much much slower. Don't understand the science, but understand the common sense.
As you rightly say, 2 years and still some people don't understand.
Some people are willfully, beligerantly and deliberately ignorant.
Winston" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Imagine wearing a mask to stop transmission of a virus you haven't got. Madness If humanity needed masks to survive viruses we'd have evolved them and look like The Predator. I'll stick to my innate defences and immune system. My freedoms doesn't end where the sheets fear begins." Do you understand how evolution occurs? You seem to confuse it with mutation. Evolution is a process that occurs slowly over many generations at the expense of the death or reduced procreation from those less well adapted. What ever adaptions our species might evolve to better filter out viruses would be defeated by viruses that can evolve in weeks rather than centuries. Our human interventions in health and birth control have even started to reverse evolution from natural selection | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19?" They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19?" We've been told why for nearly two years. Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? After two years are you still not aware of the fact that mask wearing is primarily to prevent you from spreading the disease to other people? The advice has always been to wear a well fitted N95 to protect yourself and medical staff wear even more substantial face coverings in high risk situations. You have seen the photos of their faces after a shift, haven't you?" After two years are you still not aware of the fact that the majority of people who wear masks use ill-fitting pieces of cloth? So if people wear an ill-fitting piece of cloth to protect others, no wonder the advice is to wear a properly-fitted N95 mask to protect yourself! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Erm: my understanding is that Omicron, unlike Delta, targets our upper tract and NOT our lower tract (lungs)...hence milder symptoms???
It seems to me that covid can attack multiple organs and areas of the body regardless of variant I personally think it varies form person to person dependent on how good their immune response is, I could be wrong obviously which is fine, but my brother who probably contracted the delta variant when he had covid last year has been left with heart problems that he didn't have before (palpitations and prolonged spikes in heart rate) which he is now seeing a long covid clinic for as they belive it has been caused by the virus
You are wrong so glad you are fine with this...
Google "omicron upper respiratory"..."So looking at the articals found googling omicron upper respiratory it does seem that yes it is more adapted to infecting tissues in the throat than the lungs which they think is what is making it much easier to transmit and leanding to less damage to the lungs, note that the studies say less not no damage to the lungs so I would say at worst I was partially wrong with my statement, it's still a respiratory infection which can and does cause damage to the lungs, fortunately just not as badly as previous variants have. It does prove though that it is always worth reading the whole of an article before drawing conclusions | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs Do tin foil hats work? Only if you use it shiny side up "I'd been using foil the wrong side upo in cooking for years - when I got it right, wow, what a difference. Off out into the woods now with the foil the right way round inside my beanie hat, will let you know if it keeps away aliens/police/locals/badgers etc. Mr Bicpl | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. " Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really." We do not live in the USA. You do not believe the CDC. You believe random people on YouTube and Facebook, apparently. You understand what the word "help" means. Therefore you understand that it assists in protecting the wearer if it is worn properly. Not worn properly means is less effective which is not the same as ineffective. Again the Swiss cheese model of multiple layers of protection ranging from vaccines, to hand washing, to distance, to mask wearing, to well adjusted mask wearing etc. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really." Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense." What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them." Concentration of viable Covid particles in the air is generally some magnitude less than that of CS gas in your example gas chamber... it it wasn’t the virus would have been though everyone on the planet in a matter of weeks if not days. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them." You say you're neither knowledgeable or qualified but take zero notice of those who are. Baffling. I'd have thought in the 2 years since this shitstorm started you might have learnt something.
Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them." I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period." Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. You say you're neither knowledgeable or qualified but take zero notice of those who are. Baffling. I'd have thought in the 2 years since this shitstorm started you might have learnt something.
Winston "I learnt one thing - your jokes are shit!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask." How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? " Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you." Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end!" It is a cul-de-sac because most people are perfectly capable of wearing a mask properly and they do. A cul-de-sac because you agree that a mask will REDUCE the spread of droplets that may prevent infection with Covid. A cul-de-sac because a mask, even just hanging in front of your face will do more good than anything you have in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. Pedantry is alive and well at the end of your keyboard. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. " Measures that reduce the spread of a virus that has killed 5.6 million worldwide also help reduce the transmission of flu. Hospitals were overrun to the extent that midwives were working in A&E. "Average age of death, over the actual average of death." No idea what this means unless you are implying that older people dying doesn't matter. Our Prime Minister, Trump, Putin and Bolsanaro being cockwombles I fully agree with. All but Putin have caught and been severely ill from Covid. Measures to try an keep people safe have had very significant consequences. Alternatively, people are severely ill and die. Not having sufficient medical staff before vaccines and lockdowns to man ICU leads to inability to treat other medical conditions. Having to stop elective surgery again because more than half of patients in Covid surge are unvaccinated causes more deaths. For trying to keep deaths below 159,000 and global deaths below 5.6 million, well worth it given the pre-lockdown and pre-vaccination infection, severe illness and death rates. You are welcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. Measures that reduce the spread of a virus that has killed 5.6 million worldwide also help reduce the transmission of flu. Hospitals were overrun to the extent that midwives were working in A&E. "Average age of death, over the actual average of death." No idea what this means unless you are implying that older people dying doesn't matter. Our Prime Minister, Trump, Putin and Bolsanaro being cockwombles I fully agree with. All but Putin have caught and been severely ill from Covid. Measures to try an keep people safe have had very significant consequences. Alternatively, people are severely ill and die. Not having sufficient medical staff before vaccines and lockdowns to man ICU leads to inability to treat other medical conditions. Having to stop elective surgery again because more than half of patients in Covid surge are unvaccinated causes more deaths. For trying to keep deaths below 159,000 and global deaths below 5.6 million, well worth it given the pre-lockdown and pre-vaccination infection, severe illness and death rates. You are welcome." Zzzzzzzzzzzzz | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yep no more masks in public another fuck up by this fucking twats we have telling us what to do next thing will stick two pencils up your nose and pit your pants on your head" Can't quite get if you're disappointed about no longer being told you must wear a mask. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end! It is a cul-de-sac because most people are perfectly capable of wearing a mask properly and they do. A cul-de-sac because you agree that a mask will REDUCE the spread of droplets that may prevent infection with Covid. A cul-de-sac because a mask, even just hanging in front of your face will do more good than anything you have in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. Pedantry is alive and well at the end of your keyboard." A mask hanging in front of your face is utterly useless in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. A properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. I think my option is more effective than yours! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. Measures that reduce the spread of a virus that has killed 5.6 million worldwide also help reduce the transmission of flu. Hospitals were overrun to the extent that midwives were working in A&E. "Average age of death, over the actual average of death." No idea what this means unless you are implying that older people dying doesn't matter. Our Prime Minister, Trump, Putin and Bolsanaro being cockwombles I fully agree with. All but Putin have caught and been severely ill from Covid. Measures to try an keep people safe have had very significant consequences. Alternatively, people are severely ill and die. Not having sufficient medical staff before vaccines and lockdowns to man ICU leads to inability to treat other medical conditions. Having to stop elective surgery again because more than half of patients in Covid surge are unvaccinated causes more deaths. For trying to keep deaths below 159,000 and global deaths below 5.6 million, well worth it given the pre-lockdown and pre-vaccination infection, severe illness and death rates. You are welcome." Here is is look, mr snooze fest lying and making up bull numbers. Search for FOI/2021/3240 Freedom of information request published by office for national statistics for 2020 and 2021 Deaths from coved-19 with no underlying causes was 17,371 Professor Karol Sikora, university of Buckingham states there has been an extra 50,000 deaths from cancer over the past 18 months we would otherwise not had. Due to the fear and panick and draconian policies. Failure to report early Difficulty to see GP Fear of hospital admission Missed chemotherapy Missed radiotherapy And that's just cancer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end! It is a cul-de-sac because most people are perfectly capable of wearing a mask properly and they do. A cul-de-sac because you agree that a mask will REDUCE the spread of droplets that may prevent infection with Covid. A cul-de-sac because a mask, even just hanging in front of your face will do more good than anything you have in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. Pedantry is alive and well at the end of your keyboard. A mask hanging in front of your face is utterly useless in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. A properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. I think my option is more effective than yours! " So you are wearing an FFP3 mask to reduce the spread of Covid, because it reduces the transmission of a potentially lethal virus? Good. Although, nobody suggested that you should wear a cloth mask in a highly hazardous environment, did they? You do enjoy the dead horse flogging. You'll be back, because you can't help yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end! It is a cul-de-sac because most people are perfectly capable of wearing a mask properly and they do. A cul-de-sac because you agree that a mask will REDUCE the spread of droplets that may prevent infection with Covid. A cul-de-sac because a mask, even just hanging in front of your face will do more good than anything you have in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. Pedantry is alive and well at the end of your keyboard. A mask hanging in front of your face is utterly useless in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. A properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. I think my option is more effective than yours! So you are wearing an FFP3 mask to reduce the spread of Covid, because it reduces the transmission of a potentially lethal virus? Good. Although, nobody suggested that you should wear a cloth mask in a highly hazardous environment, did they? You do enjoy the dead horse flogging. You'll be back, because you can't help yourself." No, it was you who mentioned the global pandemic. I said a properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. But you carry on putting words into my mouth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Everyone just states facts that they've read or been told. Does this actually make you an expert or scientist? Probably not. Boring covid trash talk. Two years in and nowts changed. Absolute fake virus and total utter brainwashing. Fake virus? Why have ‘they’ (whoever they are ) created a fake virus ? Probably never know. Fake virus appears, flu dissappeared. Hospitals overrun? They really weren't. Average age of death, over the actual average of death. Push vaccines, death count rises. Lockdowns for minions, not for the rulers. Mask mandate, the rulers have broken that one. Can't see family and friends, not for the rulers. Mental health increases. Patients no treatments. Death count rises. Oh, for flu symptoms. For 99.7% survival rate. Makes no sense at all. Prove me wrong. Measures that reduce the spread of a virus that has killed 5.6 million worldwide also help reduce the transmission of flu. Hospitals were overrun to the extent that midwives were working in A&E. "Average age of death, over the actual average of death." No idea what this means unless you are implying that older people dying doesn't matter. Our Prime Minister, Trump, Putin and Bolsanaro being cockwombles I fully agree with. All but Putin have caught and been severely ill from Covid. Measures to try an keep people safe have had very significant consequences. Alternatively, people are severely ill and die. Not having sufficient medical staff before vaccines and lockdowns to man ICU leads to inability to treat other medical conditions. Having to stop elective surgery again because more than half of patients in Covid surge are unvaccinated causes more deaths. For trying to keep deaths below 159,000 and global deaths below 5.6 million, well worth it given the pre-lockdown and pre-vaccination infection, severe illness and death rates. You are welcome. Here is is look, mr snooze fest lying and making up bull numbers. Search for FOI/2021/3240 Freedom of information request published by office for national statistics for 2020 and 2021 Deaths from coved-19 with no underlying causes was 17,371 Professor Karol Sikora, university of Buckingham states there has been an extra 50,000 deaths from cancer over the past 18 months we would otherwise not had. Due to the fear and panick and draconian policies. Failure to report early Difficulty to see GP Fear of hospital admission Missed chemotherapy Missed radiotherapy And that's just cancer" As the resident "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands of scientific" papers and understands everything, I think that the source of lies is easily identified. So you are saying that many of the people who died of Covid would have died anyway? Does it matter if they die now or in 5 or 10 years time? Not to you, I guess. Why are excess deaths so high then? Because cancer patients didn't get treated? As they are vulnerable to Covid they would have caught Covid as it raged through their immuno-surpressed bodies right? So no problem if they die now or in 5 or 10 years time, right? Data for up to 50,000 missing cancer diagnoses, NOT deaths comes from McMillan cancer research who do not doubt the severity of Covid nor that the measures brought in were necessary. They want more resources to help with the backlog. There advice for people with cancer regarding Corona is: "Have all doses of the covid vaccine, including boosters when they are offered to you. Have the flu vaccine when it is offered to you. Follow local guidelines for what you can and cannot do. Continue to take covid precautions that feel right for you, for example: meet people outside when possible wear a mask in public places or when meeting indoors with people you don’t live with avoid crowds continue with good hand washing/hand sanitising keep rooms well ventilated if you have guests at home. Try to avoid close contact with people who have not been vaccinated. If you live with children or anyone else who has not been vaccinated, you can ask them to continue to take extra care. You and your household can carry out regular self-testing for covid with lateral flow tests. If anyone has symptoms of covid, they should self-isolate and book a PCR test straight away." Any more of your "facts" by this Professor Sikora? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/01/false-hope-pandemic-dangerous-disinformation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end! It is a cul-de-sac because most people are perfectly capable of wearing a mask properly and they do. A cul-de-sac because you agree that a mask will REDUCE the spread of droplets that may prevent infection with Covid. A cul-de-sac because a mask, even just hanging in front of your face will do more good than anything you have in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. Pedantry is alive and well at the end of your keyboard. A mask hanging in front of your face is utterly useless in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. A properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. I think my option is more effective than yours! So you are wearing an FFP3 mask to reduce the spread of Covid, because it reduces the transmission of a potentially lethal virus? Good. Although, nobody suggested that you should wear a cloth mask in a highly hazardous environment, did they? You do enjoy the dead horse flogging. You'll be back, because you can't help yourself. No, it was you who mentioned the global pandemic. I said a properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. But you carry on putting words into my mouth." I honestly have no clue what you are arguing about or why. There is more than enough evidence to follow the advice to wear a well fitted cloth mask with multiple layers of material as part of multiple measures to reduce the spread of Corona so as to minimise the risk to you and others. If you don't want to, don't but please stop talking about CS gas and respirators and badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing, anywear! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mask mandates made no difference to infection rates. They don't work to prevent viral infections, and this is backed by over 30 years worth of research done on medical professionals. How most people are using and re-using masks is beyond unhygienic. People claiming there's scientific papers that prove masks work. Those papers (which don't prove much anyway) were published months after mask mandates were introduced. The mandates were introduced days after so called "top medical officials" claimed masks do nothing on a symptomatic cases. So masks was a political decision not based on any science. Again, for your benefit as a "medicinal chemist" who has read "thousands" of scientific papers, masks are not expected to prevent infection. They reduce it when used in addition to a range of other measures. There was no advice to wear them initially because there was no evidence to suggest that the transmission was airborne. When it was found to be, mask wearing was recommended. As someone who claims to be "scientist" you would know that it is not possible to "prove" the efficacy of mask wearing because it is difficult to isolate the effects of its use alone in a population. However, there have been progressively more data to confirm this. Why do surgeons wear masks in theatre? Surgical masks mainly protect patients from droplets from the surgeon and the surgeon from blood splatter from the patient. They were not designed to protect against viruses. Surgical masks have feck all to do with protection from blood splatter or whatever. That's what visors and goggles are for. Surgical masks are designed to minimise infectious particles and bits of sputum moving from the surgeon to the patient. They prevent transmission of infectious organisms from surgeon to patient, absolutely no reciprocal protection for the surgeon. The question was about surgical masks. Obviously a visor provides primary protection against blood splatter. A surgical mask offers secondary protection. Layered defence. My reply was about surgical masks. They are not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything. They are designed to protect the person or people in the vicinity of the wearer. If a surgical mask is not designed nor used to protect the wearer from anything, why is everyone wearing a mask with a similar design to protect themselves from COVID-19? They're not. They're wearing them to protect the people AROUND them from COVID. That's how it works. My mask protects you. At no point has anyone claimed that surgical or cloth masks protect the wearer and at all times, we HAVE been told that wearing a mask is designed to be reduced the spread of viral particles from the mouth/nose of the wearer. Really? The CDC in the US think otherwise. As of 6th Dec 2021, they are saying; "Masks also help reduce inhalation of these droplets by the wearer (“filtration for wearer protection”). The community benefit of masking for SARS-CoV-2 control is due to the combination of these two effects (source control and filtration for wearer protection); individual prevention benefit increases with increasing numbers of people using masks consistently and correctly." Obviously for any mask to be effective it needs to be fitted properly and worn when protection is required. It also needs to be suitable for the operating environment and be able to filter particles it is protecting the wearer (when inhaling) and other people (when exhaling) from. Basic stuff really. Just so that it is clear a mask covering your mouth and nose, even relatively loosely will prevent most fluid droplets from escaping. However, when you breath in air (and whatever is suspended in it) will take a path of least resistance to your nose and mouth. It will find gaps in if they are available. Consequently you will help others more than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask, but it all helps. Regardless, you seem to be suggesting that mask wearing is a good idea though. Pleased that it is starting to make sense. What? How will a poorly fitting mask help others? You'll have to explain that again in plain English. Remember I'm neither knowledgeable or qualified. However, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, a poorly fitting mask helps nobody! Wearing a suitable and properly fitted mask when in a hazardous environment is a good idea. Again, in my experience from wearing a respirator in a gas chamber, lifting the mask away from your face to practice eating and drinking drills, you were guaranteed to get an eyeful and mouthful of CS gas. From that I can say that taking a mask off for an extended period of time to eat a meal in a restaurant provides no protection to the mask wearer nor others around them. I have already had to try to explain breathing to you. Just do what your doing and put your hand across your mouth and nose. You will notice that breathing out is felt over a very localised area infront of your mouth and nose. Breathing in, you will feel air being drawn on from around your cheeks as well. Everybody I have seen who is bothering to wear a mask properly (not a chin mask) seems to make an effort to fit it reasonably well, as they seem to take their responsibility seriously. Do you not wear your mask properly when the need arises? You can continue to talk about a small minority, but it seems like wasted effort. Your experience of wearing a gas mask is only appropriate for the unfortunate medical staff in high risk clinical settings. They've been doing so for two years. Regardless you are correct that a well fitted mask is very good at REDUCING viral spread rather than eliminating. One of many layers to reduce risk, including vaccines and hand washing and distance: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f It is up to you to assess the risk when eating. Closely packed tables or spaced. A low ceilinged cellar or a large space? Plastic dividers or open? I thought that you wanted choice. Of course, vaccinations allow you to be able to live a far more normal life than before as the chance of infection is significantly reduced for the vaccinated and even the unvaccinated as fewer people will be infected and for a shorter period. Hold a hand over your mouth and nose to mimic a poorly fitting mask. When exhaling, the mask is pushed away from the face, causing any gaps to increase. More air will be able take the path of least resistance. When inhaling, the mask will collapse against the face, causing any gaps to shrink. Less air will be able take the path of least resistance. Consequently you will help others less than you will help yourself with a poorly fitting mask. How do you breathe? You exhale enough air to move a mask? What a numpty cul-de-sac of a conversation. If you really don't believe a mask helps and the only option is an NBC gasmask and vaccines are of no use and the virus is not serious then its just spamming the thread. Oh well. You can only try, but if you are determined to find a way to disbelieve then you will. Well done you. Yes, believe it or not a mask is pushed away from the face you exhale and will collapse against the face when you inhale. Air pressure tends to have that effect. The effect can be exaggerated using a plastic bag. It's a cul-de-sac because your theory that a poorly fitting mask will help others more than it will help yourself has reached a dead end. I have never said the only option is an NBC gasmask. But you know that, and as usual twist the narrative and make things up when you discover you've driven yourself down a dead end! It is a cul-de-sac because most people are perfectly capable of wearing a mask properly and they do. A cul-de-sac because you agree that a mask will REDUCE the spread of droplets that may prevent infection with Covid. A cul-de-sac because a mask, even just hanging in front of your face will do more good than anything you have in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. Pedantry is alive and well at the end of your keyboard. A mask hanging in front of your face is utterly useless in reducing the spread of a global pandemic. A properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. I think my option is more effective than yours! So you are wearing an FFP3 mask to reduce the spread of Covid, because it reduces the transmission of a potentially lethal virus? Good. Although, nobody suggested that you should wear a cloth mask in a highly hazardous environment, did they? You do enjoy the dead horse flogging. You'll be back, because you can't help yourself. No, it was you who mentioned the global pandemic. I said a properly fitted mask with the correct filter provides protection in a hazardous environment. But you carry on putting words into my mouth. I honestly have no clue what you are arguing about or why. There is more than enough evidence to follow the advice to wear a well fitted cloth mask with multiple layers of material as part of multiple measures to reduce the spread of Corona so as to minimise the risk to you and others. If you don't want to, don't but please stop talking about CS gas and respirators and badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing, anywear!" He's here look, snooze fest zzzzzzzzzzz | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " like using chicken wire to keep mosquitoes out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs like using chicken wire to keep mosquitoes out. " Its designed to keep your bugs in | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I honestly have no clue what you are arguing about or why. There is more than enough evidence to follow the advice to wear a well fitted cloth mask with multiple layers of material as part of multiple measures to reduce the spread of Corona so as to minimise the risk to you and others. If you don't want to, don't but please stop talking about CS gas and respirators and badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing, anywear!" You have no clue what I was arguing about or why? That's because you've been making things up for the last couple of posts, saying I have said things when I haven't. Stick to the truth, it is far easier. As for 'badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing', you mean the disposable mask that the UN trade body, UNCTAD, estimated to have global sales of $166 billion in 2020, up from around $800 million in 2019. That's steep increase! If 'almost nobody' has been wearing them, why have sales gone up at such a rate? Feel free to respond but please, stick to the truth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it's pretty obvious by now that masks have had sod-all impact on transmission. A lot of people just don't want to admit it. They've become a comfort blanket or a political symbol for some. No one ever talks about the huge environmental impact of all these disposable masks either. will soon find out of masks have had sod all impact when the restrictions in England get dropped. No idea how you came to your conclusion at this juncture." Because there isn't a single country in the world where mask mandates have had any impact on the trajectory of infections. Prove me wrong. You in Scotland have consistently had higher infection rates than England since our last 'freedom day' in the summer despite continuing with masks and other restrictions. Same in Wales. They are completely useless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks work in part. I mean look how much it'd helped with flu. We took it for granted that the deaths from flu each year were just inevitable... yet by using hands, face and space and by people staying away from people when they had symptoms regardless of if they were flu,a cold,covid or anything else. Last year the flu deaths were low across the world. So yes they do help. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Masks work in part. I mean look how much it'd helped with flu. We took it for granted that the deaths from flu each year were just inevitable... yet by using hands, face and space and by people staying away from people when they had symptoms regardless of if they were flu,a cold,covid or anything else. Last year the flu deaths were low across the world. So yes they do help. " And perhaps when everyone is back in the workplace when someone has a cold or flu they stay at home and not bring the infection into the office. Always remember representing a member of staff who had Cystic Fibrosis and her boss was forever coming into work coughing and spluttering around her and others and just couldnt understand how this was dangerous to his team member! .... as per usual .... complaint made, boss carried on as normal and member of staff got her own office before taking early retirement and moving to a cottage on the Isle of Bute. All in all she thought it was a good result
Seriously though I hope that one of the lessons learned from this pandemic is that presenteeism should be discouraged and challenged. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I honestly have no clue what you are arguing about or why. There is more than enough evidence to follow the advice to wear a well fitted cloth mask with multiple layers of material as part of multiple measures to reduce the spread of Corona so as to minimise the risk to you and others. If you don't want to, don't but please stop talking about CS gas and respirators and badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing, anywear! You have no clue what I was arguing about or why? That's because you've been making things up for the last couple of posts, saying I have said things when I haven't. Stick to the truth, it is far easier. As for 'badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing', you mean the disposable mask that the UN trade body, UNCTAD, estimated to have global sales of $166 billion in 2020, up from around $800 million in 2019. That's steep increase! If 'almost nobody' has been wearing them, why have sales gone up at such a rate? Feel free to respond but please, stick to the truth. " A badly fitting mask is one that "fits badly" not a type of mask demonstrated by sales. Almost nobody is wearing a mask that is fitted badly. This is exhausting. If you genuinely believe that the only kind of mask that prevents the spread of viral droplets is a full face medical or military grade one then you really must know something that the people who have conducted the published studies do not. If you are accusing me of lying along with doctors, scientists and public health experts who's advice I am repeating, then I'm fine with that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People seem to fail to understand that you can't infect anyone with virus you don't have in a first place, so if people are testing themselves regularly - masks are literally more than useless. Especially those masks that you had to pull out of your back pocket where they were hanging oround your spare change, then pulled it out to walk into a restaurant, then take it off when sat down, then put it back on if you decide to stand up again, then take it off, maybe it would fall on the floor, pick it up, dust it off, put it back on when going for a pee, take it off again, put it back on to go for a smoke (I don't smoke but many people do), take it off while having a smoke, then put it on again, then take it back off when you're sat back down, then put it on when you want to leave. How many times did you touch your face? How many times did you wash your hands after touching your face? There was a viral video of nurses and doctors showing how wearing gloves is a bad idea by putting on some paint on their gloves then showing how you distribute pathogens because you were lead by false sense of security. Why is there zero videos showing how you spread them exact same pathogens by fucking around with your mask due to a mandate which doesn't make sense? " The advice was always to keep your mask on and to take care when you put it on and remove it. Also to wash after use or replace. It can be done with the straps. There are videos on how to wear a mask if you look. The most significant study on face mask efficacy is in India where there was no access to YouTube. Of course, if you are certain, do the work and show that they are no use. Otherwise I will accept that the published science is correct. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even the cdc are now saying cloth and surgical masks have very limited effectiveness and are now recommending n95 masks instead. For anyone that bothered look look at the published literature on the subject 2 years ago ago this was glaring obvious. " ‘Limited effectiveness’ isn’t the same as not effective. Some effect is better than none lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I honestly have no clue what you are arguing about or why. There is more than enough evidence to follow the advice to wear a well fitted cloth mask with multiple layers of material as part of multiple measures to reduce the spread of Corona so as to minimise the risk to you and others. If you don't want to, don't but please stop talking about CS gas and respirators and badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing, anywear! You have no clue what I was arguing about or why? That's because you've been making things up for the last couple of posts, saying I have said things when I haven't. Stick to the truth, it is far easier. As for 'badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing', you mean the disposable mask that the UN trade body, UNCTAD, estimated to have global sales of $166 billion in 2020, up from around $800 million in 2019. That's steep increase! If 'almost nobody' has been wearing them, why have sales gone up at such a rate? Feel free to respond but please, stick to the truth. A badly fitting mask is one that "fits badly" not a type of mask demonstrated by sales. Almost nobody is wearing a mask that is fitted badly. This is exhausting. If you genuinely believe that the only kind of mask that prevents the spread of viral droplets is a full face medical or military grade one then you really must know something that the people who have conducted the published studies do not. If you are accusing me of lying along with doctors, scientists and public health experts who's advice I am repeating, then I'm fine with that." Please do not insinuate that I've accused you of 'lying along with doctors, scientists' etc. I've made it very clear in my replies when I thought you have lied. But it comes as no surprise that you can't even tell the truth when I said you were lying! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Even the cdc are now saying cloth and surgical masks have very limited effectiveness and are now recommending n95 masks instead. For anyone that bothered look look at the published literature on the subject 2 years ago ago this was glaring obvious. ‘Limited effectiveness’ isn’t the same as not effective. Some effect is better than none lol" No, that is not the CDC guidance: 'The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday updated its guidance on masks for the general public, now saying that people "may choose" to wear N95 and KN95 masks because they offer the best protection against Covid-19.' 'Previously, the CDC did not recommend that the general population wear N95 masks or KN95s, a similar type of mask made in China, fearing that a run on those higher-quality masks would impact the supply in health care settings. The CDC now says shortages are no longer a concern.' https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/cdc-updates-mask-guidelines-know-n95-kn95-masks-rcna12302 A full military grade respirator will be even better, as recommended by another poster on here. However, one item being more effective is not the same as "Limited effectiveness". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I honestly have no clue what you are arguing about or why. There is more than enough evidence to follow the advice to wear a well fitted cloth mask with multiple layers of material as part of multiple measures to reduce the spread of Corona so as to minimise the risk to you and others. If you don't want to, don't but please stop talking about CS gas and respirators and badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing, anywear! You have no clue what I was arguing about or why? That's because you've been making things up for the last couple of posts, saying I have said things when I haven't. Stick to the truth, it is far easier. As for 'badly fitting masks which almost nobody has been wearing', you mean the disposable mask that the UN trade body, UNCTAD, estimated to have global sales of $166 billion in 2020, up from around $800 million in 2019. That's steep increase! If 'almost nobody' has been wearing them, why have sales gone up at such a rate? Feel free to respond but please, stick to the truth. A badly fitting mask is one that "fits badly" not a type of mask demonstrated by sales. Almost nobody is wearing a mask that is fitted badly. This is exhausting. If you genuinely believe that the only kind of mask that prevents the spread of viral droplets is a full face medical or military grade one then you really must know something that the people who have conducted the published studies do not. If you are accusing me of lying along with doctors, scientists and public health experts who's advice I am repeating, then I'm fine with that. Please do not insinuate that I've accused you of 'lying along with doctors, scientists' etc. I've made it very clear in my replies when I thought you have lied. But it comes as no surprise that you can't even tell the truth when I said you were lying!" You seem genuinely confused about what a poorly fitting mask is. It is a mask worn incorrectly, not a type of mask. If you do not think that face masks are effective, you are calling them liars. If you don't think that Covid vaccines are as safe as any others, you are calling them liars. If you do not believe that vaccines reduce spread, you are calling them liars. If you don't believe that vaccines reduce the probability of severe illness and death, you are calling them liars. If you do not believe that Covid is a serious illness and has created a global pandemic, you are calling them liars. I think that they are correct. Who's lying? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs " I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant" You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work." See I would be more inclined to belive it if it came from a Guinea Pig rather than a hamster, much more reliable source of scientific information  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work." Or the d*unken mps who party whilst you're not allowed out  . I can totally see why you'd trust them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work. Or the d*unken mps who party whilst you're not allowed out . I can totally see why you'd trust them. "It wasn't the MPs or the PM who concluded scientifically that covering the mouth and nose help to reduce transmission of an airborne virus, they and he just repeated what the science is.. Which most with an ounce of common sense knew in any case.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work. Or the d*unken mps who party whilst you're not allowed out . I can totally see why you'd trust them. "Just because we are run by muppets it doesnt mean we should do as they do, I dont have much faith in our government and never have. I do however have faith in my own knowledge and the knowledge of scientists that have devoted their lives to researching their respective fields so choose to trust them and the information that they provided regardless of what bumbling boris and his piss head mates do or dont do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work. Or the d*unken mps who party whilst you're not allowed out . I can totally see why you'd trust them. "Only children under 10 years old play the "he's not doing it, so I won't do it" game. Our politicians did not decide the efficacy of wearing face masks. That determination was made by people who've spent their entire life researching and working in this field. The real experts. Winston | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go look up the size of the average respiratory virus which particles are air borne and they are adapted small enough to escape through the microscopic hole that allow air to pass , as the virus has adapted to get deep in your lungs to bind to ace two receptors in the epithelial in your lungs I was able to find a multitude of research result's that prove face coverings offer some degree of protection but cannot find a single viable research that proves they don't which in itself must be significant You'd think so, wouldn't you? But on the other side of the argument, we have the d*unken wisdom of Terry down the pub who heard off the wife's cousin's hamster that masks don't never work. Or the d*unken mps who party whilst you're not allowed out . I can totally see why you'd trust them. "And the connection between d*unken MPs and the effectiveness of face coverings is ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
