• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Coronavirus

Coronavirus - The Poll

  • Total voters
    97
Asking the questions is what science is - that is part and parcel of the hundreds of thousands of scientist-hours I referred to previously.

Ignoring the science and not doing it because of a spurious reason is not science, it's stupidity.

Thalidomide and bogus smoking claims were both the result of aggressive marketing coming above good science (and were both well over half a century ago!). Extending the same logic you should really think carefully before getting on a large ocean-going ship because a well known one sunk in 1912.
 
Last edited:
BigT said:
Aren’t those two sentences contradictory? wearing a mask surely is a medical intervention.




And there it is, the exact mentality why we are now out of the EU, well you are too stupid so just do as your told.

It right to question science, it’s not always correct, there was a time when smoking was considered good for you, and let’s not even mention Thalidomide.
By questioning something the logical thing to then do is to go and find out more information on that thing (and not from Wikipedia), you can then come to a logical decision that you feel is right for you or your child.
I did exactly this for the vaccine myself, I didn’t just rush off to get jabbed (I was well down the order anyway) but did some research, then some more research and came to the conclusion that taking the vaccine was a small risk but the benefits outweighed these so went ahead and booked it as soon as it was my turn.
To question something is not stupid or selfish it’s quite the opposite, to blindly do something that a government or someone in authority tells you to do is stupid.
Click to expand...

No because one is the equivalent of wearing a safety device, there are hundreds of examples of legally mandated safety equipment (seatbelts, car seats, hard hats etc). The wearing of a mask is also reversible and causes no harm to the wearer.

Having a vaccine is an invasive medical intervention that is irreversible. The two are completely different.
 
WillPS said:
Asking the questions is what science is - that is part and parcel of the hundreds of thousands of scientist-hours I referred to previously.

Ignoring the science and not doing it because of a spurious reason is not science, it's stupidity.

Thalidomide and bogus smoking claims were both the result of aggressive marketing coming above good science (and were both well over half a century ago!). Extending the same logic you should really think carefully before getting on a large ocean-going ship because a well known one sunk in 1912.
Click to expand...

Ocean going ships sink all of the time, that’s also science, iron / steel is more dense than water.


Dave said:
No because one is the equivalent of wearing a safety device, there are hundreds of examples of legally mandated safety equipment (seatbelts, car seats, hard hats etc). The wearing of a mask is also reversible and causes no harm to the wearer.

Having a vaccine is an invasive medical intervention that is irreversible. The two are completely different.
Click to expand...

I disagree that a rag made from somebody’s old tee shirt draped over your face is a safety device.

We can at least agree on that vaccines and face masks are two different things though.
 
BigT said:
I disagree that a rag made from somebody’s old tee shirt draped over your face is a safety device.

We can at least agree on that vaccines and face masks are two different things though.
Click to expand...

You keep saying you disagree that face masks work, but the evidence shows they do. I don’t know what else you want really, the safety profile of wearing masks is proven.
 
Dave said:
You keep saying you disagree that face masks work, but the evidence shows they do. I don’t know what else you want really, the safety profile of wearing masks is proven.
Click to expand...

I’ve been banging on from day 1 that face masks only work if they are properly rated and worn correctly otherwise they are next to useless.
These bandanas and pieces of cloth are a waste of time, you either do it properly or not bother.
 
BigT said:
I’ve been banging on from day 1 that face masks only work if they are properly rated and worn correctly otherwise they are next to useless.
These bandanas and pieces of cloth are a waste of time, you either do it properly or not bother.
Click to expand...

I do agree with this. What the U.K. government should have done is only allow decent masks to have been sold. These thin bits of cotton with pretty pictures on them are a complete waste of time. And surgical masks only last for 4 hours. The state of some peoples masks I’ve seen out … I’m amazed there haven’t walked off their faces
 
GaryH said:
I do agree with this. What the U.K. government should have done is only allow decent masks to have been sold. These thin bits of cotton with pretty pictures on them are a complete waste of time. And surgical masks only last for 4 hours. The state of some peoples masks I’ve seen out … I’m amazed there haven’t walked off their faces
Click to expand...

Its more complicated than that, in an ideal world everyone would be wearing the best of the best in facemasks but even a single ply sheet restricts propagation of the virus. If you want guaranteed non transmission the general face masks are not great but if your aiming to minimise viral load they do work and a smaller viral load improved disease outcome.

People are seeing things in the binary, reducing the viral load doesn’t stop transmission but it does reduce the severity of the illness someone experiences.
 
Am I correct in saying that the higher grade masks are only effective in stopping you from getting the virus if they are worn very tight, to a level that they leave imprints into your face, any looser and the air/virus can seep around the edge. Hence why those clear shields are pretty much useless in stopping any transmission of the virus.
 
I don't think we need to be making curt digs at other members of this forum without actually making any worthwhile contribution to the discussion. I've removed a couple of posts as a result of this. We're aware it's a hot topic and strong opinions are bound to be disagreed with, but let's try to be respectful please.

Thanks.
 
Try and spit through a standard cloth face mask, you’ll see it reduces the spread of the droplets significantly. Face masks were never mandated on the basis of protect the wearer from others, but because they (even basic ones) are effective in protecting others from the wearer. But much like a vaccine, many are of the incorrect view that it doesn’t benefit them personally so it’s a waste of time.
 
RoyJess said:
Am I correct in saying that the higher grade masks are only effective in stopping you from getting the virus if they are worn very tight, to a level that they leave imprints into your face, any looser and the air/virus can seep around the edge. Hence why those clear shields are pretty much useless in stopping any transmission of the virus.
Click to expand...

The more protective masks need to create a complete seal. In hospitals you get tested with a range of sizes to check the fit (it’s a fun 10 minutes with a bag over your head seeing if you can taste or smell a chemical they pump into the bag, if you can the mask isn’t fitting).

They tend to leave a mark after a while.
 
tayspru said:
Try and spit through a standard cloth face mask, you’ll see it reduces the spread of the droplets significantly. Face masks were never mandated on the basis of protect the wearer from others, but because they (even basic ones) are effective in protecting others from the wearer. But much like a vaccine, many are of the incorrect view that it doesn’t benefit them personally so it’s a waste of time.
Click to expand...

That’s not really a fair reflection though is it? Try sneezing through a cloth mask and then come back and tell me they stop all of the water droplets, I have hay-fever so I know they don’t.

We aren’t ever going to agree on the use of face masks and that’s fine, Boris has said it won’t be illegal not to wear one from next Monday so after that it will be a personal choice and I’ve made mine.

Also try telling an 80 year old that they took the vaccine to protect others, no they didn’t it was to protect themselves.
I (a 47 year old) also took the vaccine to protect me not others, that thought never even crossed my mind.
However what the young are being asked is a slightly different question, are they willing to take a proportionally slightly bigger risk to protect others more than themselves?
I don’t think it’s fair on them just to gloss over that question, then call them selfish if they come to the conclusion they would rather not take that risk however slight.
Make a good argument by all means but just ridiculing people by calling them names isn’t the correct solution.
 
BigT said:
That’s not really a fair reflection though is it? Try sneezing through a cloth mask and then come back and tell me they stop all of the water droplets, I have hay-fever so I know they don’t.

We aren’t ever going to agree on the use of face masks and that’s fine, Boris has said it won’t be illegal not to wear one from next Monday so after that it will be a personal choice and I’ve made mine.

Also try telling an 80 year old that they took the vaccine to protect others, no they didn’t it was to protect themselves.
I (a 47 year old) also took the vaccine to protect me not others, that thought never even crossed my mind.
However what the young are being asked is a slightly different question, are they willing to take a proportionally slightly bigger risk to protect others more than themselves?
I don’t think it’s fair on them just to gloss over that question, then call them selfish if they come to the conclusion they would rather not take that risk however slight.
Make a good argument by all means but just ridiculing people by calling them names isn’t the correct solution.
Click to expand...
But when you sneeze it captures a large proportion - it reduces the spread (not eradicates) and the whole approach is risk reduction

Your perception of the purpose of vaccines is fundamentally flawed. If it was only to protect the person that gets it, why would the scientists be encouraging everyone to get one, why would world governments spend billions to make them available to healthy people. Vaccines by their nature are given to everyone (regardless of how affected they would be by the virus) because it builds group immunity and helps reduce the chances of mutation

 
tayspru said:
But when you sneeze it captures a large proportion - it reduces the spread (not eradicates) and the whole approach is risk reduction

Your perception of the purpose of vaccines is fundamentally flawed. If it was only to protect the person that gets it, why would the scientists be encouraging everyone to get one, why would world governments spend billions to make them available to healthy people. Vaccines by their nature are given to everyone (regardless of how affected they would be by the virus) because it builds group immunity and helps reduce the chances of mutation
Click to expand...

That might well be true but it doesn’t come into most people’s thoughts when taking a vaccine and the COVID ones were certainly not “marketed” like that, it was about protecting yourself hence why the elderly got it first.
Maybe a change of tact with the marketing is needed but then that runs the risk of people not coming forward if they think it’s not about protecting them.
 
BigT said:
That might well be true but it doesn’t come into most people’s thoughts when taking a vaccine and the COVID ones were certainly not “marketed” like that, it was about protecting yourself hence why the elderly got it first.
Maybe a change of tact with the marketing is needed but then that runs the risk of people not coming forward if they think it’s not about protecting them.
Click to expand...

The health service, scientists and to be fair the government have been pretty clear that getting vaccinated for the young (40 and below in this case) is about protecting others rather than themselves.

I don’t think many have done it for purely altruistic purposes however, you had to be living in a cave not to see that a whole host of freedoms would be predicated on getting vaccinated, which is why I suspect many young folk got the vaccine.
 
Last day of my quarantine today, thank god! All my major symptoms have now dissipated, however I still feel quite lethargic and my sense of smell has yet to return. Having done some research this seems like it could be a relatively long term effect from having covid so I’m prepared to not have that for a while. Had some pretty rough days in the last 10 days but will be glad to get back out and back to a theme park this weekend, yet I do feel it will take a lot of my energy doing so.
 
Connor98 said:
Last day of my quarantine today, thank god! All my major symptoms have now dissipated, however I still feel quite lethargic and my sense of smell has yet to return. Having done some research this seems like it could be a relatively long term effect from having covid so I’m prepared to not have that for a while. Had some pretty rough days in the last 10 days but will be glad to get back out and back to a theme park this weekend, yet I do feel it will take a lot of my energy doing so.
Click to expand...

Good to hear you're on the mend! Don't go rushing yourself back into things, take it slow and steady and you'll be back up to full strength in no time :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top