Corona Virus

[murphy]

3 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Used in this way perhaps they help a little, but i suspect that in the process of taking them off, virus on the outside of the gloves is likely to be transferred to your hands. The way to stop this is to sanitise the gloves before taking them off or after doing so, but then you may as well have just sanitised your hands before getting in the car anyway.

 

Agree about the amount of plastic waste. I really hope hospitals in particular have decent disposal pathways.

Gloves just peel off inside out, easy to take off without touching either hand. 

 

I prefer gloves because I know that the virus can't penetrate them whereas with hand sanitiser, I wouldn't be confident that I would always get 100% coverage or make sure that every virus particle is killed, plus just the action of using it could transfer particles to the exterior of the bottle..

 

I guess both are effective but it's whatever you're most comfortable with I suppose.

 

Edited 17 May 2020 by murphy

[Bayfox]

1 hour ago, bmt said:

Are people meant to be wearing masks now? The government (and others) saying there's no evidence they work outside a clinical setting looks really stupid if we are.

I'm a little confused myself to be honest. But surely if this virus is spread by vapour droplets. If everyone was covering mouths and noses with masks, that drastically reduces the chance of it spreading. 

 

We have made cotton masks for our family and friends. And will be wearing them if we have to venture out in public to often. If it stops someone, coughing, sneezing or spitting on our direction and prevents it entering our bodies, I'll take looking a twat over catching the ****ing thing.

 

Plus as we have made our own from cotton, we can put filters in them and dispose of them every day, plus the masks can go in the wash every night if they have too. 

 

Others can do as they seem fit, but if that's the only way I'm likely to catch/avoid the thing I'll do it, and no one is visiting our house any time soon so they wont be leaving the virus on surfaces.

 

If 90% of the population took the same notion we would dramatically reduce the infection rate. Hardly a shock numbers have gone back up today after the VE bank holiday and returning to work is it.

 

I've had to go work to feed my family, but I'd rather be home if I had the option, but I've worn a mask everyday in the hope I avoid the bloody thing. Touch wood so far I'm ok.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, bmt said:

Are people meant to be wearing masks now? The government (and others) saying there's no evidence they work outside a clinical setting looks really stupid if we are.

 

3 minutes ago, Bayfox said:

I'm a little confused myself to be honest. But surely if this virus is spread by vapour droplets. If everyone was covering mouths and noses with masks, that drastically reduces the chance of it spreading. 

 

We have made cotton masks for our family and friends. And will be wearing them if we have to venture out in public to often. If it stops someone, coughing, sneezing or spitting on our direction and prevents it entering our bodies, I'll take looking a twat over catching the ****ing thing.

 

Plus as we have made our own from cotton, we can put filters in them and dispose of them every day, plus the masks can go in the wash every night if they have too. 

 

Others can do as they seem fit, but if that's the only way I'm likely to catch/avoid the thing I'll do it, and no one is visiting our house any time soon so they wont be leaving the virus on surfaces.

 

If 90% of the population took the same notion we would dramatically reduce the infection rate. Hardly a shock numbers have gone back up today after the VE bank holiday and returning to work is it.

 

I've had to go work to feed my family, but I'd rather be home if I had the option, but I've worn a mask everyday in the hope I avoid the bloody thing. Touch wood so far I'm ok.

Masks have been part of the scenery since this thing broke and even before that here in Korea.

 

It's probably not solely responsible for the (pretty decent) results over here - it's one of a number of factors. However, it might have helped with keeping things running and allowing people to go out and do stuff while keeping infection rates down rather than having to go with a full lockdown as many other countries have had to do.

[WigstonWanderer]

2 hours ago, Bayfox said:

I'm a little confused myself to be honest. But surely if this virus is spread by vapour droplets. If everyone was covering mouths and noses with masks, that drastically reduces the chance of it spreading. 

 

We have made cotton masks for our family and friends. And will be wearing them if we have to venture out in public to often. If it stops someone, coughing, sneezing or spitting on our direction and prevents it entering our bodies, I'll take looking a twat over catching the ****ing thing.

 

Plus as we have made our own from cotton, we can put filters in them and dispose of them every day, plus the masks can go in the wash every night if they have too. 

 

Others can do as they seem fit, but if that's the only way I'm likely to catch/avoid the thing I'll do it, and no one is visiting our house any time soon so they wont be leaving the virus on surfaces.

 

If 90% of the population took the same notion we would dramatically reduce the infection rate. Hardly a shock numbers have gone back up today after the VE bank holiday and returning to work is it.

 

I've had to go work to feed my family, but I'd rather be home if I had the option, but I've worn a mask everyday in the hope I avoid the bloody thing. Touch wood so far I'm ok.

I think you’re absolutely right. Also initial viral loads are likely to be lower through use of masks and this is thought to be a significant factor in the severity of the illness.

Edited 17 May 2020 by WigstonWanderer

[Crinklyfox]

I'm more than a little disappointed at the advice given throughout this crisis.  Several times when questioned on policy we've been told that we are 'following the science' and when the scientific professionals have been questioned on several occasions we've been told that there is a study ongoing to research the particular issue and that policy is developing.  Well I can understand the process and the discipline scientists have, they like to be absolutely confident before they make any changes.  The problem is that while we wait for their studies to conclude people are getting sick and dying.

 

I would be more impressed if a 'safety first' approach was taken as it would save lives; for example we know that it is likely that the darker a persons skin, the more likely they are to die if they contract the virus (ONS data supports this) and that the scientists have an ongoing study.  Rather than just wait for the study to conclude why are those doctors and nurses who have dark skins not removed from the Covid-19 wards and reassigned to other hospital wards.  If the study concludes that skin colour has no effect then they could be reassigned again; if not then we can be pretty sure that lives have been saved.

[Milo]

1 hour ago, Crinklyfox said:

I'm more than a little disappointed at the advice given throughout this crisis.  Several times when questioned on policy we've been told that we are 'following the science' and when the scientific professionals have been questioned on several occasions we've been told that there is a study ongoing to research the particular issue and that policy is developing.  Well I can understand the process and the discipline scientists have, they like to be absolutely confident before they make any changes.  The problem is that while we wait for their studies to conclude people are getting sick and dying.

 

I would be more impressed if a 'safety first' approach was taken as it would save lives; for example we know that it is likely that the darker a persons skin, the more likely they are to die if they contract the virus (ONS data supports this) and that the scientists have an ongoing study.  Rather than just wait for the study to conclude why are those doctors and nurses who have dark skins not removed from the Covid-19 wards and reassigned to other hospital wards.  If the study concludes that skin colour has no effect then they could be reassigned again; if not then we can be pretty sure that lives have been saved.

Good shout. 
 

 

Blimey - can you imagine the reaction if this was the other way round?

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, Crinklyfox said:

I'm more than a little disappointed at the advice given throughout this crisis.  Several times when questioned on policy we've been told that we are 'following the science' and when the scientific professionals have been questioned on several occasions we've been told that there is a study ongoing to research the particular issue and that policy is developing.  Well I can understand the process and the discipline scientists have, they like to be absolutely confident before they make any changes.  The problem is that while we wait for their studies to conclude people are getting sick and dying.

 

I would be more impressed if a 'safety first' approach was taken as it would save lives; for example we know that it is likely that the darker a persons skin, the more likely they are to die if they contract the virus (ONS data supports this) and that the scientists have an ongoing study.  Rather than just wait for the study to conclude why are those doctors and nurses who have dark skins not removed from the Covid-19 wards and reassigned to other hospital wards.  If the study concludes that skin colour has no effect then they could be reassigned again; if not then we can be pretty sure that lives have been saved.

We know that following the science is a defunct phrase now anyway as all of the science indicates children are just as effective spreaders of the virus as adults yet were reopening our schools on June 1st. 

[Guest Markyblue]

2 hours ago, Crinklyfox said:

I'm more than a little disappointed at the advice given throughout this crisis.  Several times when questioned on policy we've been told that we are 'following the science' and when the scientific professionals have been questioned on several occasions we've been told that there is a study ongoing to research the particular issue and that policy is developing.  Well I can understand the process and the discipline scientists have, they like to be absolutely confident before they make any changes.  The problem is that while we wait for their studies to conclude people are getting sick and dying.

 

I would be more impressed if a 'safety first' approach was taken as it would save lives; for example we know that it is likely that the darker a persons skin, the more likely they are to die if they contract the virus (ONS data supports this) and that the scientists have an ongoing study.  Rather than just wait for the study to conclude why are those doctors and nurses who have dark skins not removed from the Covid-19 wards and reassigned to other hospital wards.  If the study concludes that skin colour has no effect then they could be reassigned again; if not then we can be pretty sure that lives have been saved.

If you take it to that level how about moving every white medical staff over 50. Also any medical staff with asthma,  diabetes or many other listed problems,  there would nobody left to care for anybody. 

[Guest Markyblue]

Just now, Lionator said:

We know that following the science is a defunct phrase now anyway as all of the science indicates children are just as effective spreaders of the virus as adults yet were reopening our schools on June 1st. 

We cannot shut down for ever ,we are suppressing the virus not eliminating it, the nhs is at 20% capacity for critical care beds, we have to live with the virus and hard decisions have to be faced.  Otherwise lets lockdown for 18 months and everything we know as normal will be destroyed.  The country has to start getting back to a new normal until a vaccine is found,  we are beginning to do more long term damage to people's health by destroying our economy,  mental health and serious health conditions are being ignored at the moment and a health care time bomb is ticking away.

[joachim1965]

2 minutes ago, Markyblue said:

We cannot shut down for ever ,we are suppressing the virus not eliminating it, the nhs is at 20% capacity for critical care beds, we have to live with the virus and hard decisions have to be faced.  Otherwise lets lockdown for 18 months and everything we know as normal will be destroyed.  The country has to start getting back to a new normal until a vaccine is found,  we are beginning to do more long term damage to people's health by destroying our economy,  mental health and serious health conditions are being ignored at the moment and a health care time bomb is ticking away.

Ultimately, without a vaccine, herd immunity will be the only way.

[Guest Markyblue]

1 minute ago, joachim1965 said:

Ultimately, without a vaccine, herd immunity will be the only way.

Absolutely but with protection for the most vulnerable. 

[Crinklyfox]

14 minutes ago, Markyblue said:

If you take it to that level how about moving every white medical staff over 50. Also any medical staff with asthma,  diabetes or many other listed problems,  there would nobody left to care for anybody. 

There are numerous risk factors.  A safety first risk-based approach should concentrate on the factors with the highest prevalence and the most significant outcomes.  

[st albans fox]

8 hours ago, bmt said:

Are people meant to be wearing masks now? The government (and others) saying there's no evidence they work outside a clinical setting looks really stupid if we are.

Even if it makes a 5% difference then why not do it?  I just don’t understand our govt being unwilling to make it a requirement on public transport and indoor settings rather than advisory.  I suspect that they aren’t able to logistically provide cheap masks for commuters at stations. That’s a bit ridiculous.......... 
 

what’s the rule in Germany.  I saw people in a Dortmund pub yesterday watching the game - some with masks, some without (or was that because they have  to remove them whilst they drink their beer!) 

 

same would apply in a restaurant/cafe/coffee bar I guess .......

 

Or just maybe, they are comfortable with a R close to 1 (and occasionally a tad higher) as it allows for a gradual infection of the community over time ............

 

[worth_the_wait]

Here's a question ...
 
Health issues were decentralised years ago to the devolved administrations (Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland).
 
They are responsible for all aspects of health ie hospitals, care homes, health policy and planning, contingency stocks, etc.
 
So how come the ruling devolved administration parties don't get slaughtered for PPE shortages, poor track and tracing, and devastation in the care homes - in Scotland and Wales?

[st albans fox]

9 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

Here's a question ...
 
Health issues were decentralised years ago to the devolved administrations (Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland).
 
They are responsible for all aspects of health ie hospitals, care homes, health policy and planning, contingency stocks, etc.
 
So how come the ruling devolved administration parties don't get slaughtered for PPE shortages, poor track and tracing, and devastation in the care homes - in Scotland and Wales?

Do the devolved admins have the same problems at the same levels????

 

and it’s possible that given the purchasing power of PHE, they took a decision to put their PPE needs in with England’s, assuming that someone was running it properly ........

[String fellow]

Wouldn't it be great if there was a dye like ethidium bromide readily available, which made this wretched strand of RNA visible by staining it?

[foxile5]

2 hours ago, Lionator said:

We know that following the science is a defunct phrase now anyway as all of the science indicates children are just as effective spreaders of the virus as adults yet were reopening our schools on June 1st. 

It wasn't from the start really. The idea they were following the science in keeping businesses open as long as possible was dog shit too. 

 

Of course I'm sure none of the tory cronies benefited financially in Cheltenham going ahead. 

[BKLFox]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

Even if it makes a 5% difference then why not do it?  I just don’t understand our govt being unwilling to make it a requirement on public transport and indoor settings rather than advisory.  I suspect that they aren’t able to logistically provide cheap masks for commuters at stations. That’s a bit ridiculous.......... 
 

what’s the rule in Germany.  I saw people in a Dortmund pub yesterday watching the game - some with masks, some without (or was that because they have  to remove them whilst they drink their beer!) 

 

same would apply in a restaurant/cafe/coffee bar I guess .......

 

Or just maybe, they are comfortable with a R close to 1 (and occasionally a tad higher) as it allows for a gradual infection of the community over time ............

 

Can they make it law?
 

Hasn’t a recent media report stated that almost every recent arrests made under CV19 legislation has been unlawful, this is a minefield.

 

I would assume shops could turn away customers that refuse to wear masks under their “rights of refusal” but you could not arrest someone for not wearing a mask, this is down to the individual and as a very large section of people around the world still don’t believe this is happening I don’t see a mass wearing of masks by everyone any time soon.

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, BKLFox said:

Can they make it law?
 

Hasn’t a recent media report stated that almost every recent arrests made under CV19 legislation has been unlawful, this is a minefield.

 

I would assume shops could turn away customers that refuse to wear masks under their “rights of refusal” but you could not arrest someone for not wearing a mask, this is down to the individual and as a very large section of people around the world still don’t believe this is happening I don’t see a mass wearing of masks by everyone any time soon.

Buses, trains and all public transport could refuse to carry passengers not wearing but I expect that those without one would state that if it was so important then govt would have it as an instruction and not an advisory.  That’s my point (and the same will apply in shops - people will kick off without a govt instruction ).  It doesn’t need to be law but if it’s an instruction as opposed to an advisory it makes a big difference .

[The Guvnor]

10 hours ago, Bayfox said:

I'm a little confused myself to be honest. But surely if this virus is spread by vapour droplets. If everyone was covering mouths and noses with masks, that drastically reduces the chance of it spreading. 

 

We have made cotton masks for our family and friends. And will be wearing them if we have to venture out in public to often. If it stops someone, coughing, sneezing or spitting on our direction and prevents it entering our bodies, I'll take looking a twat over catching the ****ing thing.

 

Plus as we have made our own from cotton, we can put filters in them and dispose of them every day, plus the masks can go in the wash every night if they have too. 

 

Others can do as they seem fit, but if that's the only way I'm likely to catch/avoid the thing I'll do it, and no one is visiting our house any time soon so they wont be leaving the virus on surfaces.

 

If 90% of the population took the same notion we would dramatically reduce the infection rate. Hardly a shock numbers have gone back up today after the VE bank holiday and returning to work is it.

 

I've had to go work to feed my family, but I'd rather be home if I had the option, but I've worn a mask everyday in the hope I avoid the bloody thing. Touch wood so far I'm ok.

Agree, intetesting you mention your concern of looking a twat, in my eyes its everyone not wearing one who are the twats. I just wonder if it is the fear of looking different and therfore raising levels of being overly self concious which is stopping more widespread use of face coverings.

[The Guvnor]

20 hours ago, oxford blue said:

 

This from WHO shows they are not as effective as you imply:

 

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-Coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks?gclid=EAIaIQobChMInum3ydW46QIVg7TtCh3PcQglEAAYASAAEgIHoPD_BwE

 

 

The Chief scientist from the WHO was interviewed today on the AM show, specifically said this virus could be around for years and one of the things people will have to get used to is wearing face coverings when in places of large public gatherings.

 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

4 hours ago, Markyblue said:

We cannot shut down for ever ,we are suppressing the virus not eliminating it, the nhs is at 20% capacity for critical care beds, we have to live with the virus and hard decisions have to be faced.  Otherwise lets lockdown for 18 months and everything we know as normal will be destroyed.  The country has to start getting back to a new normal until a vaccine is found,  we are beginning to do more long term damage to people's health by destroying our economy,  mental health and serious health conditions are being ignored at the moment and a health care time bomb is ticking away.

Entirely agree with everything you have wrote.

Its time to start getting back to work again. Care for the vulnerable and isolate them as much as we possibly can, this needs to happen by the end of the month, not July or beyond.

The vast majority of people will not die from this disease.

 

[Finnaldo]

12 hours ago, Bayfox said:

I'm a little confused myself to be honest. But surely if this virus is spread by vapour droplets. If everyone was covering mouths and noses with masks, that drastically reduces the chance of it spreading. 

 

We have made cotton masks for our family and friends. And will be wearing them if we have to venture out in public to often. If it stops someone, coughing, sneezing or spitting on our direction and prevents it entering our bodies, I'll take looking a twat over catching the ****ing thing.

 

Plus as we have made our own from cotton, we can put filters in them and dispose of them every day, plus the masks can go in the wash every night if they have too. 

 

Others can do as they seem fit, but if that's the only way I'm likely to catch/avoid the thing I'll do it, and no one is visiting our house any time soon so they wont be leaving the virus on surfaces.

 

If 90% of the population took the same notion we would dramatically reduce the infection rate. Hardly a shock numbers have gone back up today after the VE bank holiday and returning to work is it.

 

I've had to go work to feed my family, but I'd rather be home if I had the option, but I've worn a mask everyday in the hope I avoid the bloody thing. Touch wood so far I'm ok.

I think you’re 100% right to be precautions but I just want to point out masks DO NOT prevent you from catching it. They do, however, make it harder for an infected person to pass it. 
 

So your ultimate point is right: if everyone wears one it’ll help massively prevent spread. The advice after all, is not to act  as if you’re avoiding it, but to act as if you’re not spreading it. 

[WigstonWanderer]

1 hour ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Entirely agree with everything you have wrote.

Its time to start getting back to work again. Care for the vulnerable and isolate them as much as we possibly can, this needs to happen by the end of the month, not July or beyond.

The vast majority of people will not die from this disease.

 

Haven’t done a very good job of that so far

[st albans fox]

17 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Haven’t done a very good job of that so far

Given that there are many millions of vulnerable people to this disease I’d say we haven’t done such a terrible job as a society - whether govt could have done better isn’t allowed to be debated in here ...