Coronavirus

In far east where mask wearing is habitual, I have not heard that they suffer any increased health problems. You can dissect the effectiveness of masks on a scientific level as much as you want. But on a practical level I think what has happened is that the pros have outweighed the cons which is why the government stance has changed. We are increasing our understanding of covid transmission all the time and so its not just droplet but fine aerosol suspended now. In other words the invisible vapour of our breath. Thats what the mask does...arrests the vapour.

Quote:

---

The idea is that the mouth covering restricts the transfer of CV by catching it in the covering. So that means there is likely to be a build up in that face covering.

---

Yes, but it will be your breath that is trapped inside the mask, so you will only be giving it to yourself!
If two people meet each other and both are wearing masks, there can't be any transmission on to each others masks, as there are no droplets escaping from the masks....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave_Mole

If two people meet each other and both are wearing masks, there can't be any transmission on to each others masks, as there are no droplets escaping from the masks....

---

Really - so a mask is impermeable? Never heard that before. Source?

according to the attachment on my past post, the N95 mask which I see a few wearing around town don't filter on the exhale.

It also advised that wearing a surgical mask would turn you in to a "walking virus dispenser"

as for a cloth mask - it stated that they "do not filter anything"

Now you may not have read the attachment. You might disagree - fine - but do so by providing some evidence at least.

Now the attachment might be suspect, so I thought I'd check online.

While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures. Surgical masks also do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the mask and your face.

I don't intend to get in to a back and forth - I think it's an odd policy, and an odd stage of the pandemic and I do not support it.

Witton you are misunderstanding the point (as are many). When you exhale, the air contains water in the form of a vapour and that vapour can hold suspended viruses. The mask is not providing filtration, it is restricting the distribution and reach of that vapour. Forget about filtration. Imagine more it is like going around with your hand over your mouth.

so: first off. You want sources, but don't supply any for the quote you used. The image you posted is fake. The actual CDC guidance is here and is very clear:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...coverings.html

This study shows that both surgical and N95 masks were equally effective in preventing the spread of influenza virus.
This study showed that masks and hand washing were also very effective.
This study suggests that surgical masks were more effective than home-made ones.

The timing of the decision was weird and politically driven. The WHO have been calling for their use for months: see here
and also here
Even the Americans were using them before us (kicking off a culture war in the process).


You might disagree with the evidence. You might disagree with the timing of the decision. But the reality of the situation is that, if you want to go shopping next week, you'll be needing some sort of face coveriing.

Ignoring actual facts and experts, and making up your own facts to match your righteous beliefs, might have worked for you with Brexit Witton but I’d say you’re out of your depth with covid-19 🤔

Now now boys (and girls?) lets not get into any silly squabbling

Stop it guys! I thought we had moved on from baited posting!

Quote:

---

Stop it guys! I thought we had moved on from baited posting!

---

I'm really not interested in that any more. I'm as sick of it as everyone else.

I was asked to supply some evidence and did so.
Hopefully WP will read it and think about it.
Up to him, really.

I don't think I was being provocative or baiting anyone.


So it goes....

Masquerading culture wars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V267SQzKfys

Quote:

---

go back to Narnia you weirdo

---

;):o;)

You were.. perhaps inadvertently. Check your tone. Just friendly advice!😉

Well they've got rid of Oracle it seems, so I suppose I'm the next logical target.

WP, if you found the tone of that response in any way attacking, baiting or otherwise "having a go", then I wholeheartedly and unreservedly apologise.

fair enough. I'll have a look at the info later. Still working on orders. Manic for over 2 months now, in a good way.

A quote on the radio this morning (sorry can't remember who it was) was that one of the main reasons, over and above whatever the actual benefits may or may not be, was that they wanted to boost the economy by increasing people's confidence to go in to shops. In reality I suspect it might do the opposite and people may be more inclined to avoid speculative browsing etc and only shop for essentials.

I think another point to consider is that if susceptibility is related to how well developed our immune systems are, as fellrunners we probably have an advantage. We are used to regularly drinking from random streams and shoving anything edible in our mouths with mucky sweaty hands - including assorted foodstuffs dropped by runners in front.

Nice one Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark G

I think another point to consider is that if susceptibility is related to how well developed our immune systems are, as fellrunners we probably have an advantage. We are used to regularly drinking from random streams and shoving anything edible in our mouths with mucky sweaty hands - including assorted foodstuffs dropped by runners in front.

---

We're also likely to be well topped up with Vitamin D, (research suggests some COVID related benefits apparently) as we tend to spend plenty of time outdoors. Indeed, it could be one of those rare occasions when being a sloooow plodder, such as myself, could be a distinct advantage perhaps ;).

Seriously though, I've just been listening to the pm prog. on Radio 4 and they commented on today's COVID report (sorry can't remember the title) about the Government and all of us preparing now for a likely second wave and the added complication with seasonal flu over the cold winter period. Seems clear that this virus is going to run well into next year and it's not a case of "it'll all be over by Christmas".

For those interested in prepping, Lakeland Cosmetics do 5L containers of hand santizer gel or rub. £35 on Amazon.https://www.amazon.co.uk/80-Alcohol-...744311&sr=8-16

I bought some in April, when everyone else was asking stupid rip-off prices for the same stuff, and it seems a good product (WHO formula) with next day delivery for free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark G

A quote on the radio this morning (sorry can't remember who it was) was that one of the main reasons, over and above whatever the actual benefits may or may not be, was that they wanted to boost the economy by increasing people's confidence to go in to shops. In reality I suspect it might do the opposite and people may be more inclined to avoid speculative browsing etc and only shop for essentials.

---

I heard that this was the reason they were doing it too. The Government is panicking because not enough people are going to the shops. Like you, I think it could have the opposite effect and discourage people from shopping on spec.

Certainly it seems odd from a health perspective to be making masks mandatory now given the low incidence of the virus at the moment and when it was rife back in March and April we didn’t have to wear them. Indeed at the time the stated belief was that masks might make people complacent and not socially distance.

A friend of mine who works in an off licence texted me today. She was not happy not only because she would have to wear a mask all day herself but also the issue of enforcing compliance from some of her customers. Some of the regulars are interesting characters to say the least.

Blackburn looking like the next Leicester.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagger

Blackburn looking like the next Leicester.

---

Obviously that's entirely the fault of WP not wearing a mask. :p

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-53400376

Well whether masks work or not I now have a use for a multitude of redundant race T shirts everything from Lakeland 100 to Manx Mountain Marathon but the first T shirt to facemask transformation will be Coast to Coast across Scotland.:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Well they've got rid of Oracle it seems, so I suppose I'm the next logical target.

---

Don't upset the part time moderator who comes and goes ;)

What the....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagger

Don't upset the part time moderator who comes and goes ;)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

The Government is panicking because not enough people are going to the shops.

---

It isn't shops in general that people are not going to - it is discretionary spending shops that people do not have to go to. Whilst waiting for my car to be serviced today I went in Asda, B&M and M&S (all in the same building). Asda was busy, B&M the same (I was looking for a mask as a gift for WP and obviously I wanted the cheapest one I could find:D); but M&S household/clothing was not.

If Harrods is feeling the pinch I rather doubt that compulsory mask wearing will turn things around.

Has to be said... you know where B & M is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brett

Has to be said... you know where B & M is?

---

Well only because it lies between Asda and M&S in the same building in Pudsey - where my car is serviced! (Where is Booths?):)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derby Tup

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-53400376

---

Figures show Blackburn with Darwen recorded 47 new cases per 100,000 in the week ending Saturday, up from 31.6 the previous week.

Consider this stat. From 31.6 to 47 per 100000.

This is PHE extrapolation from sample testing in the area.

Let's say they tested 10,000 in the first of these two weeks (they won't tell us how many they did but it will be far less).
They found 3 cases of COVID.

Not bad most would say.

Then in week two let's say they tested 10,000 again.
They found 4.

MAN THE BARRICADES!

That's it in a nutshell. The world has gone mad.

Correct WP

But to keep the public interest up they have to pick on a small insignificant town at least 100 mile away from London. And its your turn.

If I understand it correctly shop assistants will be exempted from the requirement to wear masks. This seems illogical. I can understand that wearing one all day would be unpleasant (trust me on this, if you don't then try wearing NBC kit for a while). But if say 1 in 4000 customers may be infected the ones who are and who go shopping may come in to close contact with a few people for comparatively short periods over an hour or two, perhaps just on one day. The 1 in 4000 shop workers who may be infectious will probably come in to similar contact with hundreds of people every day.

Stagger this isn't Govt - this is rather bogus Public Health England "Surveys" that our local authority love to jump on.
end May - Prof Harrison put out on the BwD FB page that they would not follow Govt request to start school openings 1st week June because we had a high % of Asian ethnicity in Blackburn who were at higher risk and so they would delay.
Fair enough, except that same day I went for a run around Witton and 25 ish Asian lads were having a cricket match on one of the pitches at Witton.
When I first ran past they were picking the teams on the square and when I came past again the match had commenced.
1 week later there was a full blown unofficial cricket tournament with teams travelling from as far as Birmingham.
The article mentions 200 people - that was just the players. Locals estimate over 1,000 down Witton.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-52965361

BwD put out info ticking off the organisers, claimed they had been in touch with them, but they would not name them at the moment - they still haven't - and there was no indication of any charges or fines incurred.
The police have said they could not enforce social distancing and it was a council matter - yet they were handing out fines in April.

Politics - that's what this is. The people of BwD know what's going on.

This is the Facebook announcement put out by BwD Council last night.

NEW AND IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON POTENTIAL LOCAL LOCKDOWN ⚠️
PLEASE READ NOW, TAG AND SHARE:
We are doing everything we can to avoid a local Coronavirus lockdown for Blackburn with Darwen.
The most recent figures show that we are fourth in the country for the number of cases per 100,000.
To avoid a lockdown - as seen in Leicester - our Director for Public Health is now asking ALL residents to take these new steps immediately and for at least the next month:
⚠️ A limit of 2 people from the same household allowed to visit another household
⚠️ Please wear face coverings in all enclosed public spaces
⚠️ Avoid hugging or shaking hands with anyone outside of your immediate family
⚠️ Small shops - we will be stepping up our Public Protection advice to ensure that guidelines around face coverings, social distancing, good hygiene and increased ventilation is being followed.
⚠️ Get tested - even if you don’t have symptoms this will help with case finding
Prof. Dominic Harrison said: “These steps will help and we are appealing to everyone in Blackburn with Darwen to follow them to protect themselves and their loved ones.
“If we don’t, a local lockdown, like in Leicester, becomes a very real possibility.”
Please read the full update now at: bit.ly/3gZwcQ8
It’s really important that this message reaches as many residents as possible.
Please TAG your family and friends to help keep them safe

A couple of hours later, my wife found a message on her companies FB page saying all at her work would now have to wear face masks in work.

I suggested if they asked her to wear one this morning (which she is reluctant to do) she should ask for a copy of their risk assessment.
I doubt they have done one.

According to the BBC website "Anyone who cannot wear a covering "because of any physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability", or who would experience "severe distress" from doing so, is exempt.

So presumably, if you are in an incandescent rage about the total crushing asininity of the mask-wearing fiasco, then you could arguably be exempt under the mental illness or severe distressed loopholes! Not sure how you'd prove that (some sort of certificate?) as its a tall challenge maintaining that level of peed-off-ness without years of practice.

PS why are there no mask-wearing emojos? Come on Brett get with the times- tsk!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike T

Doses of Covid cannot grow on masks - they need to be inside cells to grow.

Cloth masks interfere with exhaling CO2? - er - no.

We are constantly inhaling fungi and mildew - our immune systems know how to deal with it.

As has been said, if you dislike masks you will not be impressed with being ventilated.

I wear a mask to protect you .....

---

Interestingly,the idea that masks could increase the risk of coronavirus infection was put forward in March by the deputy chief medical officer Jenny Harries. She said masks could trap the virus, causing the person wearing one to breathe it in. I'm not sure what has changed since then.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-a9396811.html

The full quote is:
"Dr Harries told BBC News: “What tends to happen is people will have one mask. They won’t wear it all the time, they will take it off when they get home, they will put it down on a surface they haven’t cleaned.Or they will be out and they haven’t washed their hands, they will have a cup of coffee somewhere, they half hook it off, they wipe something over it. In fact, you can actually trap the virus in the mask and start breathing it in".

Asked if people are putting themselves more at risk by wearing masks, Dr Harries added: “Because of these behavioural issues, people can adversely put themselves at more risk than less.”

So not about mask wearing per-se, but poor hygiene and lack of care being an issue. In the same article, Dr Jake Dunning said “Face masks must be worn correctly, changed frequently, removed properly, disposed of safely and used in combination with good universal hygiene behaviour in order for them to be effective.”

What's changed since March is that we know more about the virus and more research has been carried out into how it spreads. I linked to some papers on it earlier. A study in May by Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz and the University of Southern Denmark found that mask-wearing could cut transmission by 40%. The evidence went from weak and unclear to marginal but positive.

Harries also said that large gatherings were not a source of infection and there were calls for her to resign over statements about testing too.

I just hope we have English company's manufacturing them and certainly not importing them.

But I doubt that ��

[QUOTE=Mark G;663988]I can understand that wearing one all day would be unpleasant (trust me on this, if you don't then try wearing NBC kit for a while).

Ah, I'd forgotten about the delights of wearing NBC kit.

After wearing that, a mask/buff/balaclava will be a doddle.

I read somewhere that the coronavirus can enter the body via the eyes.

If so we should perhaps also be wearing goggles.

NCB mask didn't do it either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave_Mole

The full quote is:
"Dr Harries told BBC News: “What tends to happen is people will have one mask. They won’t wear it all the time, they will take it off when they get home, they will put it down on a surface they haven’t cleaned.Or they will be out and they haven’t washed their hands, they will have a cup of coffee somewhere, they half hook it off, they wipe something over it. In fact, you can actually trap the virus in the mask and start breathing it in".

Asked if people are putting themselves more at risk by wearing masks, Dr Harries added: “Because of these behavioural issues, people can adversely put themselves at more risk than less.”

So not about mask wearing per-se, but poor hygiene and lack of care being an issue. In the same article, Dr Jake Dunning said “Face masks must be worn correctly, changed frequently, removed properly, disposed of safely and used in combination with good universal hygiene behaviour in order for them to be effective.”

What's changed since March is that we know more about the virus and more research has been carried out into how it spreads. I linked to some papers on it earlier. A study in May by Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz and the University of Southern Denmark found that mask-wearing could cut transmission by 40%. The evidence went from weak and unclear to marginal but positive.

Harries also said that large gatherings were not a source of infection and there were calls for her to resign over statements about testing too.

---

Isn’t that the point though, many people will wear the masks incorrectly, so there is a practical risk of infection being caused by masks. Many, probably most people won’t take the kind of care recommended by Dr Dunning. This hasn’t changed since March, people are just as likely to be careless with masks now as they were then.

With regard to Harries comments about large gatherings, if it comes to outside gatherings, they are probably not a significant source of infection. The risk of transmission outside appears to be very small and when there has been large gatherings such as BLM marches and various raves etc there has been no noticeable spike.