Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[e77]

Isn’t this the best way?

It’s not telling anyone what to do, which is what we all want.

Ministers I’ve seen speak on it have made it clear they won’t be.

I just think it utterly misses the point. They banned smoking indoors because it causes harm to others with passive smoking, they didn't leave it to personal choice. We will have younger people who haven't been double jabbed until the end of the Summer, would it have done any real harm to have people wearing masks until then?

 

[dazzer6666]

I just think it utterly misses the point. They banned smoking indoors because it causes harm to others with passive smoking, they didn't leave it to personal choice. We will have younger people who haven't been double jabbed until the end of the Summer, would it have done any real harm to have people wearing masks until then?

Very few (proportionately) of the young get ill anyway, and most of those that do are recovering far more quickly……those that are particularly worried need to make their own decisions on where they go. We’ve reached (or are about to reach) the tipping point where the disease levels and associated impacts are manageable/under control (ie ‘living with it’), so restrictive measures imposed on the large majority to protect an increasingly small minority are no longer justifiable.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I just think it utterly misses the point. They banned smoking indoors because it causes harm to others with passive smoking, they didn't leave it to personal choice. We will have younger people who haven't been double jabbed until the end of the Summer, would it have done any real harm to have people wearing masks until then?

Sage (some of) seem to be on board with it, so they must think the risk is low in which case it would be a personal choice thing, if you want to wear it.

I dont think a government can come out and say "dont wear masks" or anything else legal for that matter.

 

[e77]

Very few (proportionately) of the young get ill anyway, and most of those that do are recovering far more quickly……those that are particularly worried need to make their own decisions on where they go. We’ve reached (or are about to reach) the tipping point where the disease levels and associated impacts are manageable/under control (ie ‘living with it’), so restrictive measures imposed on the large majority to protect an increasingly small minority are no longer justifiable.

But the fact remains they do get it and long Covid is defiantly a thing and unlike most of us they haven't had the opportunity to have two jabs yet (I am 47 and the two weeks after my second jab only happened last week). In some circumstances they don't have a choice if to get on public transport or go and buy food.

I really don't think it would have made much difference to make face coverings mandatory in places like public transport and essential shops, even if not in places like pubs which are entirely optional.

 

[darkwolf666]

Sage (some of) seem to be on board with it, so they must think the risk is low in which case it would be a personal choice thing, if you want to wear it.

I dont think a government can come out and say "dont wear masks" or anything else legal for that matter.

I think, but may be wrong, that [MENTION=2223]e77[/MENTION] was trying to point out that for the past year the government have been telling us that wearing a mask is to protect others from YOU, if you unwittingly have the virus and not as protection from others.

To now say that it is personal choice to wear a mask is saying what exactly - bit of a Hobson's choice for the wearer, although I guess wearing a mask may create a small amount of protection for the wearer.

 

[e77]

Sage (some of) seem to be on board with it, so they must think the risk is low in which case it would be a personal choice thing, if you want to wear it.

I dont think a government can come out and say "dont wear masks" or anything else legal for that matter.

The whole personal choice thing is entirely disingenuous as choosing not to wear a mask is placing others at risk, not you. We currently have a load of double jabbed people over 40 (or whatever the age is now) deciding the young, who haven't had the opportunity to be fully vaccinated, will be ok and ploughing on regardless.

It would have been a (hopefully) final act of leadership and solidarity amongst generations to keep masks until everyone has had a chance to be vaccinated (if you turn it down then you are on your own frankly) but the government have pandered to the 'this has to end now' crowd.

 

[e77]

I think, but may be wrong, that [MENTION=2223]e77[/MENTION] was trying to point out that for the past year the government have been telling us that wearing a mask is to protect others from YOU, if you unwittingly have the virus and not as protection from others.

To now say that it is personal choice to wear a mask is saying what exactly - bit of a Hobson's choice for the wearer, although I guess wearing a mask may create a small amount of protection for the wearer.

Yes. I believe face coverings offer some protection to the wearer but mainly the idea is you wear it for other people. That said their effect is reduced if you are standing next to each other.

 

[e77]

Also remember it looks like booster vaccines will only be offered to the over 50s.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The whole personal choice thing is entirely disingenuous as choosing not to wear a mask is placing others at risk, not you. We currently have a load of double jabbed people over 40 (or whatever the age is now) deciding the young, who haven't had the opportunity to be fully vaccinated, will be ok and ploughing on regardless.

It would have been a (hopefully) final act of leadership and solidarity amongst generations to keep masks until everyone has had a chance to be vaccinated (if you turn it down then you are on your own frankly) but the government have pandered to the 'this has to end now' crowd.

The states have had it in place for months or weeks (it merges into one) that once double jabbed you don't have to wear a mask in most settings (all settings in some states)

I don't think they have pandered to anyone, if they had they would have ended it on the 21st when the correct data says they could have.

 

[dazzer6666]

But the fact remains they do get it and long Covid is defiantly a thing and unlike most of us they haven't had the opportunity to have two jabs yet (I am 47 and the two weeks after my second jab only happened last week). In some circumstances they don't have a choice if to get on public transport or go and buy food.

I really don't think it would have made much difference to make face coverings mandatory in places like public transport and essential shops, even if not in places like pubs which are entirely optional.

I suspect coverings will continue to be worn on public transport for a bit - even if it’ll be ‘recommended’ rather than mandatory - I can see us culturally getting closer to Asia where mask-wearing has been commonplace for years (those carrying viruses). Long covid is sadly going to be with us now whether people mask up or not…I know a couple of people that have it and it’s pretty unpleasant but but at what point do we stop with the restrictions? By the time everyone is double-jabbed the vulnerable will probably be starting on booster jabs as part of the Autumn flu jab process….do we wait until that’s completed ? And then the O60s, O50s ? You’re very quickly into permanent restrictions that way.

 

[e77]

The states have had it in place for months or weeks (it merges into one) that once double jabbed you don't have to wear a mask in most settings (all settings in some states)

I don't think they have pandered to anyone, if they had they would have ended it on the 21st when the correct data says they could have.

That would still mean the young having to wear masks and the rest of us not. They have basically spent the last 15 months locked away protecting older people and when the time comes to return the favour they get abandoned. All I am saying is facemarks remain for a couple more months until everyone who wants it is double jabbed, possibly less places like pubs that are entirely optional.

The vaccination programme wasn't advanced enough in June and Delta caught them unaware. The more people that get infected also increase the chances of mutations.

I am not saying wind anything back or we can't loosen restrictions in other areas but the whole face coverings being a personal choice argument is hugely disingenuous.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

That would still mean the young having to wear masks and the rest of us not. They have basically spent the last 15 months locked away protecting older people and when the time comes to return the favour they get abandoned. All I am saying is facemarks remain for a couple more months until everyone who wants it is double jabbed, possibly less places like pubs that are entirely optional.

The vaccination programme wasn't advanced enough in June and Delta caught them unaware. The more people that get infected also increase the chances of mutations.

I am not saying wind anything back or we can't loosen restrictions in other areas but the whole face coverings being a personal choice argument is hugely disingenuous.

They have come out and said the data was wrong.

But back to masks, I believe the N95 mask protects the wearer? So there are options for those that wish to wear one still.

 

[e77]

I suspect coverings will continue to be worn on public transport for a bit - even if it’ll be ‘recommended’ rather than mandatory - I can see us culturally getting closer to Asia where mask-wearing has been commonplace for years (those carrying viruses). Long covid is sadly going to be with us now whether people mask up or not…I know a couple of people that have it and it’s pretty unpleasant but but at what point do we stop with the restrictions? By the time everyone is double-jabbed the vulnerable will probably be starting on booster jabs as part of the Autumn flu jab process….do we wait until that’s completed ? And then the O60s, O50s ? You’re very quickly into permanent restrictions that way.

My argument is until the vaccination programme is complete, namely offered to everyone, which fits in with the government not wanting to ever go back on restrictions. I did read somewhere we reach heard immunity in September although that might very well have come forward now with the success of the vaccination programme.

At that point, boosters aside, we don't really have much more to offer apart from plans in place to stop people coming in from hotspots round the world and the ability to jump on any flair ups in this country so we have to learn to live with it.

We also need a long term plan to deal with the fallout of the pandemic including treating Long Covid and trying to help school kids catch up but that is another conversation.

 

[e77]

They have come out and said the data was wrong.

But back to masks, I believe the N95 mask protects the wearer? So there are options for those that wish to wear one still.

Who has said the data was wrong?

Don't N95 masks need training to put on and are only for short term wearing?

 

[dazzer6666]

My argument is until the vaccination programme is complete, namely offered to everyone, which fits in with the government not wanting to ever go back on restrictions. I did read somewhere we reach heard immunity in September although that might very well have come forward now with the success of the vaccination programme.

At that point, boosters aside, we don't really have much more to offer apart from plans in place to stop people coming in from hotspots round the world and the ability to jump on any flair ups in this country so we have to learn to live with it.

We also need a long term plan to deal with the fallout of the pandemic including treating Long Covid and trying to help school kids catch up but that is another conversation.

I don’t think it needs to be ‘complete’……it’s already sufficiently complete to allow relaxation without risk of the NHS being overwhelmed which has always been the key. It’s balanced risk management - the lockdown is having so many other crippling impacts. There have been vaccine drop-in centres open for weeks now where anyone can rock up and the appointment centres aren’t overly busy (including Brighton - had a long chat with one of the team from there this morning), and the first jab alone provides a decent level of protection.

Agree re cross border stuff. We need clear and consistent protocols with other countries

 

[e77]

I don’t think it needs to be ‘complete’……it’s already sufficiently complete to allow relaxation without risk of the NHS being overwhelmed which has always been the key. It’s balanced risk management - the lockdown is having so many other crippling impacts. There have been vaccine drop-in centres open for weeks now where anyone can rock up and the appointment centres aren’t overly busy (including Brighton - had a long chat with one of the team from there this morning), and the first jab alone provides a decent level of protection.

Agree re cross border stuff. We need clear and consistent protocols with other countries

I agree we are coming to the end of restrictions but the main argument against wearing face coverings in certain places for a few more weeks until everyone get's double jabbed is people don't want to wear face coverings anymore, which to me personally is a weak argument.

I suspect Europe and the US will open up for us again fairly soon as their vaccine programmes are going well now but I can see other places being touch and go for years. Oddly I think Australia might be a problem as I was reading they are having people being picky about have the Astra Zeneca vaccine on the grounds there got off relatively lightly and people don't see the urgency.

 

[dazzer6666]

I agree we are coming to the end of restrictions but the main argument against wearing face coverings in certain places for a few more weeks until everyone get's double jabbed is people don't want to wear face coverings anymore, which to me personally is a weak argument.

I suspect Europe and the US will open up for us again fairly soon as their vaccine programmes are going well now but I can see other places being touch and go for years. Oddly I think Australia might be a problem as I was reading they are having people being picky about have the Astra Zeneca vaccine on the grounds there got off relatively lightly and people don't see the urgency.

Yep…mutual ‘double-jabbed’ freedom to travel between countries………otherwise it’s going to be difficult. The tourist industry in some places will benefit (particularly from the huge pent-up demand that is waiting to explode), and be crucified in others.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Who has said the data was wrong?

Don't N95 masks need training to put on and are only for short term wearing?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...elling-pushed-back-june-21-based-out-of-date/

Among other bits

An N95 respirator is a respiratory protective device designed to achieve a very close facial fit and very efficient filtration of airborne particles. Note that the edges of the respirator are designed to form a seal around the nose and mouth. Surgical N95 Respirators are commonly used in healthcare settings and are a subset of N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators (FFRs), often referred to as N95s.

We had people at work wearing them without hassle - all masks should be single use really.

 

[dsr-burnley]

My argument is until the vaccination programme is complete, namely offered to everyone, which fits in with the government not wanting to ever go back on restrictions. I did read somewhere we reach heard immunity in September although that might very well have come forward now with the success of the vaccination programme.

At that point, boosters aside, we don't really have much more to offer apart from plans in place to stop people coming in from hotspots round the world and the ability to jump on any flair ups in this country so we have to learn to live with it.

We also need a long term plan to deal with the fallout of the pandemic including treating Long Covid and trying to help school kids catch up but that is another conversation.

Unless children are going to be vaccinated, then there will always be a reason to wear masks to protect yourself, but there will never be a reason to wear masks to protect others.

The risk to the young is still very small. The number of people aged under 25 who have died with coronavirus mentioned on the death certificate, has just reached 100 for the last 16 months. In 2021, it is 3% of deaths (excluding infant deaths) of people in that age group.

In May and June 2021 (up to 18th June, the latest info), the number of deaths of people under 25 is 1 (one). Excluding infants, 406 people that age have died, but only 1 had coronavirus on their death certificate. We have to start considering at some point that the cure is worse than the disease.

Total number of people who died with any sort of respiratory disease in week ending 18th June = 3,651. Number of those who had coronavirus = 102. That's 2.8%. Number of people who died with a respiratory disease as the primary cause in w/e 18th June = 1,245. Number of those who died of coronavirus = 74. (Flu and pneumonia got 264.) I don't quote these figures to trivialise the deaths, just to show how relatively small the impact of coronavirus is at present compared with other respiratory diseases. It is not - at present, and thanks to the vaccine probably never - a disease doing unprecedented damge.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...nalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

(Incidentally,

 

[e77]

So in summary the main argument for not mandating wearing masks on public transport and similar for a few weeks and reducing the long term chance of people who have waited to get a vaccine having long term health problems is it is going to mildly inconvenience people?

What a great country we have become.