Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Detournement]

2 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:

I really couldn't give a shit one way or the other about masks personally but I feel pretty sorry for those who are needing to wear them for 8 hour shifts at work - especially in a hot airless bar, must be hellish.

Put me in the "everything rides on football in August" club 

I have to wear one at work and I'm definitely more worried about breathing in plastic fibers for thousands of hours in the past year than I am about Covid. 

[pandarilla]

You are seeing two camps.
Those who see them as a restiction of our liberties which people fought for centuries to achieve.
And those who don't have a problem with them.
What is interesting in this whole covid fiasco is how quick people are to sneer, act in a dismissive, sanctimonious manner towards others and play the "morality card" until restrictions start to affect them personally. You see that with the nursery graduation crowd.

Hypocrisy? In what way?

At the start of the pandemic there was a proper point-and-laugh attitude on here at anyone who was wearing a mask because the experts at the time said it wasn't going to make a difference.

Then there was slowly but surely a move towards demanding masks be worn as the evidence seemed to change. People were slated for not wearing them.

And now we've come full circle.

[TheScarf]

10 minutes ago, Johnny van Axeldongen said:

Outdoor restrictions are an absolute nonsense. 

The chances of you catching it off someone outside must be close to zero.  

[Bairnardo]

Havent seen any of scotgov briefing today, but in general, media seem to have return to absolute fear overdrive in recent days, with today particularly bad

[Johnny van Axeldongen]

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

The SNP hate football fans and more generally ending football fan culture appears to be a goal across Europe.

 

Nationalism is a part of "Football fan culture", so yeah they want to end that for sure.

[djchapsticks]

I was OK with masks for a long time and definitely in the 'better off safe' camp. Particularly at the time when community transmission was going more or less unchecked, there were no vaccines or feasible treatments available and it was used in conjunction with a whole litany of other measures designed to keep people as shielded and protected as possible.

Fast forward over a year though and we're at a stage where the overwhelming majority of people in the country are protected or well on their way to being so with a tremendous vaccination programme, transmission amongst vulnerable groups is at minute levels and the entire practice of social distancing appears to be, to put it kindly, inconsistent verging on non-existent then you need to ask 'what more are masks bringing here?'

To use the proponents of ongoing lockdowns own argument against them when they said, 'vaccines alone don't work, it's restrictions alongside vaccines that drive cases down', then surely by their own logic, facemasks do not work either without further extensive and potentially harmful restrictions complimenting them. Why would you wear a mask without social distancing? Why the need to wear a mask outside in a well ventilated space such as a football match? Why need to wear a mask indoors whilst moving around a crowded pub, restaurant or gym but not whilst sitting down?

I understand that many on here think that people asking these questions are being facetious, callous or uncaring but they are questions that really do need to be asked because without anyone actually providing the data of what differences face coverings by themselves make to cases and transmission in an environment where you have to wear them in certain situations (ie moving around) and not in others (ie sitting), then you are always going to have people rightly questioning why it's now needed when nothing else seemingly is?

[Johnny van Axeldongen]

Has Nicola Sturgeon ever gone on TV and told the population the hospitalisation and death rates for each age group?

[Detournement]

12 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

At the start of the pandemic there was a proper point-and-laugh attitude on here at anyone who was wearing a mask because the experts at the time said it wasn't going to make a difference.

Then there was slowly but surely a move towards demanding masks be worn as the evidence seemed to change. People were slated for not wearing them.

And now we've come full circle.

And did they make a difference? Clearly not!

The argument being put forward is that we need to continue with mask wearing to protect vulnerable people but mask wearing didn't prevent high transmission during the second or third waves. 

Also if you believe the various figures put out about transmission of Alpha Vs Delta and Vacced Vs Unvacced then a vaccinated person is now as likely to transmit Delta as anyone was to transmit Alpha. 

It's also unclear to me whether the likelihood of transmission Vacced Vs Unvacced comes from control groups or is extrapolated from current raw NHS data? If they are just comparing the two populations then it's massively flawed as the unvaccinated cohort will have far higher close contact levels.

[BlueBear]

31 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

At the start of the pandemic there was a proper point-and-laugh attitude on here at anyone who was wearing a mask because the experts at the time said it wasn't going to make a difference.

Then there was slowly but surely a move towards demanding masks be worn as the evidence seemed to change. People were slated for not wearing them.

And now we've come full circle.

Government downplayed masks because we didn't have any, so they stuck with narrative whilst trying to resource them behind the scenes. They Yanks of course were hijacking other countries shipments of them. Remember? 

So once we were stocked up, the narrative changed. 

There is still much to learn about this virus and its effects. Unknowns are high risk, so caution is the better part of valour. 

It is nowhere near at an end and many twists and turns yet to come, and some that might just be not be what we want to see or hear. 

The roller coaster ride is far from over.

Edited July 13, 2021 by BlueBear

[BlueBear]

2 minutes ago, Johnny van Axeldongen said:

Has Nicola Sturgeon ever gone on TV and told the population the hospitalisation and death rates for each age group?

She is the leader of government ffs. That shit is for the hired help. 

I want to hear strategic level rantings from our leader, not the dross that you can pick up anywhere, anytime from any rag. 

[bairn88]

Look at the crowd at Edgbaston for the cricket today. Can't have more than 500 per stand at Celtic Park or Ibrox though, oh no 

[Granny Danger]

I won’t have a problem wearing a mask in a shop/supermarket, on public transport, in hospital/doctors/dentists but not sure there’s a case for it elsewhere once the restrictions are lifted.

Wearing one in a restaurant until you’re seated seems a bit ott but certainly wouldn’t be a huge issue.

Better to have clear regulations from the SG than trying to pass the buck for populist reasons like Johnson is doing.

[Abdul_Latif]

5 minutes ago, BlueBear said:

Government downplayed masks because we didn't have any, so they stuck with narrative whilst trying to resource them behind the scenes.

Shitebaggery of the highest order.

How anyone can trust them is beyond me.  

[realmadrid]

1 minute ago, bairn88 said:

Look at the crowd at Edgbaston for the cricket today. Can't have more than 500 per stand at Celtic Park or Ibrox though, oh no 

Anyone watching Cricket should leave the forum.

 

[BlueBear]

5 minutes ago, Detournement said:

And did they make a difference? Clearly not!

The argument being put forward is that we need to continue with mask wearing to protect vulnerable people but mask wearing didn't prevent high transmission during the second or third waves. 

Also if you believe the various figures put out about transmission of Alpha Vs Delta and Vacced Vs Unvacced then a vaccinated person is now as likely to transmit Delta as anyone was to transmit Alpha. 

It's also unclear to me whether the likelihood of transmission Vacced Vs Unvacced comes from control groups or is extrapolated from current raw NHS data? If they are just comparing the two populations then it's massively flawed as the unvaccinated cohort will have far higher close contact levels.

Cutting through all the shite, the result is the result and in that we are also shite. 

Many unknowns remain and that equals high risk in any business, so the caution in Nicola is appropriate, unlike I need to be liked super tit in Downing Street. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Hypocrisy? In what way?

Not you - during your absence there were some here that were very pro-masking that have now flipped 180 degrees.

[djchapsticks]

6 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I won’t have a problem wearing a mask in a shop/supermarket, on public transport, in hospital/doctors/dentists but not sure there’s a case for it elsewhere once the restrictions are lifted.

 

Again though, if there are not any other restrictions, why would there be a requirement for masks in any of these places? It's not being awkward for the sake of it by asking this, I think people genuinely want to know.

[pandarilla]

I was OK with masks for a long time and definitely in the 'better off safe' camp. Particularly at the time when community transmission was going more or less unchecked, there were no vaccines or feasible treatments available and it was used in conjunction with a whole litany of other measures designed to keep people as shielded and protected as possible.
Fast forward over a year though and we're at a stage where the overwhelming majority of people in the country are protected or well on their way to being so with a tremendous vaccination programme, transmission amongst vulnerable groups is at minute levels and the entire practice of social distancing appears to be, to put it kindly, inconsistent verging on non-existent then you need to ask 'what more are masks bringing here?'
To use the proponents of ongoing lockdowns own argument against them when they said, 'vaccines alone don't work, it's restrictions alongside vaccines that drive cases down', then surely by their own logic, facemasks do not work either without further extensive and potentially harmful restrictions complimenting them. Why would you wear a mask without social distancing? Why the need to wear a mask outside in a well ventilated space such as a football match? Why need to wear a mask indoors whilst moving around a crowded pub, restaurant or gym but not whilst sitting down?
I understand that many on here think that people asking these questions are being facetious, callous or uncaring but they are questions that really do need to be asked because without anyone actually providing the data of what differences face coverings by themselves make to cases and transmission in an environment where you have to wear them in certain situations (ie moving around) and not in others (ie sitting), then you are always going to have people rightly questioning why it's now needed when nothing else seemingly is?

The point about not wearing them whilst sitting down is because you're eating and drinking, and therefore it's not possible to continue to wear a mask (or at least it would lead to some hilarious sights).

As well as that you're with the people you're with, and so if you're contagious, then you're not really spreading droplets any further round the restaurant /bar.

I can understand why they'd rather you wear them whilst moving around. It's adding a layer of protection, even if it's not a strong layer.

And did they make a difference? Clearly not!
The argument being put forward is that we need to continue with mask wearing to protect vulnerable people but mask wearing didn't prevent high transmission during the second or third waves. 
Also if you believe the various figures put out about transmission of Alpha Vs Delta and Vacced Vs Unvacced then a vaccinated person is now as likely to transmit Delta as anyone was to transmit Alpha. 
It's also unclear to me whether the likelihood of transmission Vacced Vs Unvacced comes from control groups or is extrapolated from current raw NHS data? If they are just comparing the two populations then it's massively flawed as the unvaccinated cohort will have far higher close contact levels.

I don't think you can say it made no difference. Maybe the cases would've been even higher without them?



Just to be clear I'm not advocating keeping masks. As a teacher, I'm very much hoping they f**k off whilst kids are in the classroom (i don't mind too much if we still need them whilst walking the corridors).

From what i can gather the evidence is still pretty inconclusive about whether masks protect folk from this virus.

I just think this thread has taken a bit of a wild ride on this issue.

[sparky88]

1 hour ago, Frank Grimes said:

As long as everything else is lifted by August 9th as intended I’ll be content 

Haha

[SANTAN]

52 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

This thread has had a very interesting relationship with mask wearing.
 

I've posted this before but at the start of the pandemic I worked in a small shop, right near the start of all this when masks weren't even being discussed, a coworker used to come in for her shift wearing a big mask and gloves on, she even asked other staff stuff like "oh do you not have a mask"... fast forward a few months and mask wearing is mandatory in the shops and this same coworker had the audacity to walk around not wearing a mask and when asked about it said it was because she says she has asthma. 

These people are psychological messes.