• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

SKIP THE FACE MASKS! ....... Ummmm........ HANG ON! U-TURN?

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
That's what I do. Have 4 KN95 masks and don't go out every day so they get well over 72 hours to 'recover'. Also, my thinking is that if the outside of the mask gets contaminated, that's stuff that would have been in my lungs otherwise (unless it's from my hands but I make sure I don't touch them). Might be worth covering your face with a scarf too though to stop yourself touching the mask and contaminating it that way. Can wash that every time you come home.

Could also wear sunglasses/glasses which offer some protection. Feel like a right dick wearing sunglasses indoors mind.

(I wonder how many people will die because they didn't want to look like a **** in a mask though? Must be some people at least :grimacing:)

Cashier sneezed when serving me today, I'm certainly glad I was wearing a mask (although not exactly glad she sneezed).

Quite. It's not the time to worry about how one looks. Can't understand how anyone would not recognise priorities but then so many know not to be close to others but still do so.
 

Yazata

Active Member
What is the 'better data' that wasn't previously available that makes it 'rational' to advise them now, but not weeks ago?

Hi Augustus.

The way I hear it, most simple masks aren't all that effective in protecting their wearers from viruses. Viruses are very small. They are most effective in stopping larger liquid droplets from coughs or sneezes that viruses 'like' to ride on. And up until recently the medical people didn't know about the large number of unsymptomatic people out there who feel fine but are infectious.

They have always recommended that people who feel ill wear a mask. But now they think that with possible carriers out there ("superspreaders") who don't know they have it, maybe everyone should wear a mask to stop the tiny aerosol droplets.

What we knew about masks was always sufficient for us to advise people to wear them as the default option. We should have be waiting for 'more and better data' that it was not beneficial to wear them, not the other way around.

The problem here in the United States at least is that we have very few manufacturers of masks. Most of the factories that would have made them closed long ago and "off-shored" their production to Asia, mostly. (The US and UK used to have textile industries, believe it or not.) We Import the vast majority of our masks, mostly from China I think. And China has been having some problems of their own recently and they suddenly need all their locally produced masks.

Here in the US it's almost impossible to find masks for sale. There are some on Amazon, but they look like rip-off profiteers to me. So good luck finding any. The limited numbers of locally produced ones are distributed through back-channels directly to hospitals and medical professionals. At the present time, they are working frantically to ramp up production, but that takes a little while even though the simpler masks are very low-tech. (Intensive care ventilators are a harder problem.)

It isn't all that difficult to make your own masks at home that approach a surgical mask in effectiveness. There are instructions on the Internet, for example:

Make a mask
 
Hi Augustus.

Hi :)

The way I hear it, most simple masks aren't all that effective in protecting their wearers from viruses. Viruses are very small. They are most effective in stopping larger liquid droplets from coughs or sneezes that viruses 'like' to ride on. And up until recently the medical people didn't know about the large number of unsymptomatic people out there who feel fine but are infectious.

They have always recommended that people who feel ill wear a mask. But now they think that with possible carriers out there ("superspreaders") who don't know they have it, maybe everyone should wear a mask to stop the tiny aerosol droplets.

Aren't all that effective =/= completely ineffective though, and every little helps. They certainly aren't ideal, but anything that offers even rudimentary protection is of great value as it might save your life. Even reducing the viral load on people who do get infected could be very important regarding how bad the infection is.

It's worse in terms of carriers though. We already knew people who are asymptomatic may spread viruses. The idea that it is considered important for symptomatic carriers to weak masks, but asymptomatic carriers were specifically being told not to wear masks is what I find scandalous.

Even a scarf for these people serves as a very useful barrier, and we could have had all these people wearing masks months ago with no real downside.

When faced with a novel, complex and highly dangerous situation you can't rely on a strict 'evidence based' approach as the perfect information doesn't exist, and by the time it does it's too late. You need to use a precautionary approach based on what you do know, and that certainly would have had people wearing masks.

The whole sorry situation has been naive scientism at its worst.

The problem here in the United States at least is that we have very few manufacturers of masks. Most of the factories that would have made them closed long ago and "off-shored" their production to Asia, mostly. (The US and UK used to have textile industries, believe it or not.) We Import the vast majority of our masks, mostly from China I think. And China has been having some problems of their own recently and they suddenly need all their locally produced masks.

Hopefully this will make people realise that you can't rely on global supply chains of essential products, as when you most need them, they won't be there. An optimised, global system breaks down as it has no redundancy, and redundancy is necessary to cope with shocks.

Countries need to identify what products are essential, foods, equipment, etc. and ensure these are made in their own country. This may entail some protectionist policies for core industries (not for non-core) and would also help local manufacturing economies.

Unfortunately, I have little faith that we will learn from this as we are too short sighted and have short memories. We'll continue going on assuming that the worst can never happen.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Update (UK)
Masks must now be worn at/on:-
Doctor's Surgeries.
Veterinary Surgeons.
Buses
Coaches
Trams
Trains
Underground (Tubes)
Hospitals
Care Homes
Any places where 2 meters distancing is difficult.

The list is sure to build up over the next few weeks.

If we had been wearing masks from early February, would our fatalities have been much reduced? I do wonder now.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Many experts have now decided that coronavirus is airborne and can be spread much more easily than was believed a few months ago.

Scotland has just made it law that masks must be worn in any retail premises ......as well as when in or using any of the long list in the previous post.

How many lives were lost....?
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Many experts have now decided that coronavirus is airborne and can be spread much more easily than was believed a few months ago.

Scotland has just made it law that masks must be worn in any retail premises ......as well as when in or using any of the long list in the previous post.

How many lives were lost....?

You have to wonder what might have happened if mask use had been made a priority from the start - with a campaign to make sure home-made ones were what was recommended for the vast majority thus freeing up the demand on medical ones - plus the hand-washing and distancing.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
You have to wonder what might have happened if mask use had been made a priority from the start - with a campaign to make sure home-made ones were what was recommended for the vast majority thus freeing up the demand on medical ones - plus the hand-washing and distancing.

Yes..... absolutely....

Back in early March the use of face masks was being positively suppressed. It was considered to be most odd to suggest their use at all. All those Asians wearing them ....... so silly!

Back then I was insisting that since humans touch their faces so much that masks had to benefit wearers for that reason alone.

We are now hearing that masks are essential in any locations where people collect ........ that the virus can drift in the air.

Truth is...... sadly, we just got this virus wrong. In the UK we've spent all our money keeping folks at home, but now that we are entering the worst depression in our history we have to come out; so I guess that we would not have approached this sickness in the same way if we could turn back the clock.

But I would never blame anybody here for any of that......... who knew?
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Yes..... absolutely....

Back in early March the use of face masks was being positively suppressed. It was considered to be most odd to suggest their use at all. All those Asians wearing them ....... so silly!

Back then I was insisting that since humans touch their faces so much that masks had to benefit wearers for that reason alone.

We are now hearing that masks are essential in any locations where people collect ........ that the virus can drift in the air.

Truth is...... sadly, we just got this virus wrong. In the UK we've spent all our money keeping folks at home, but now that we are entering the worst depression in our history we have to come out; so I guess that we would not have approached this sickness in the same way if we could turn back the clock.

But I would never blame anybody here for any of that......... who knew?

I suppose the worse case scenario - of a virus that could hang around in the air (for who knows how long), that could be passed around by touching (but unknown as to for how long it might be active), and that many could be asymptomatic or have delayed symptoms (but still be infectious) - was not seen as a realistic one, but perhaps it should have been. And where mask use might have prevented a lot of the spread.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
I suppose the worse case scenario - of a virus that could hang around in the air (for who knows how long), that could be passed around by touching (but unknown as to for how long it might be active), and that many could be asymptomatic or have delayed symptoms (but still be infectious) - was not seen as a realistic one, but perhaps it should have been. And where mask use might have prevented a lot of the spread.
Yes, I reckon that you are right.

It is highly likely that face masks will be a requirement for all shoppers in England in the next few days.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Here it is, folks! :)
It will be mandatory for everybody in England to wear face masks in all shops and closed premises as from 24th July.

The specialists here are warning that deaths from Covid in the UK could possibly reach 125,000 this winter. (the range was 25,000-125,000)

THE PENNY DROPPED, EVENTUALLY........
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Update.....

This evening the BBC News showed a film of Doctor Fauci advising all US States to promote the wearing of face masks by everyone.

The 'Skip the masks' line appears to be over and done with ....... for sure......
 
Top