Coronavirus - Strange times

Locked
cdd
Posts: 2607
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 14.05

cwathen wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 10.36What I did imagine might happen is that by now the bar for taking action would have been raised, and keep being raised until a Western country finally says enough is enough and does not reintroduce any measures
Given the sustained case/death rates, about which nobody is complaining, the bar has absolutely been raised.

I personally agree with much of the rest of your post, but the world has moved on. The only measures reimposed are ones that don’t inconvenience most people. This thread wasn’t even on the first page until recently!
gottago
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu 29 Jan, 2009 19.50

cwathen wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 10.36
cdd wrote: Fri 03 Dec, 2021 23.50 Oh goody. I’d missed this cheerful thread.
I was strongly against reimposing mandatory masks because, aside from it being demonstrably obvious that they don't do anything
Eh? That's not true at all. Where did you get that one from?

Generally, despite the new opportunity of fearmongering for the press, things actually are looking positive at the moment. Cases of Omicron in South Africa appear to have generally mild symptoms and there's early indications that the vaccines are continuing to work. The spike in Europe that was the main news story before Omicron suggested that the full unlocking at the start of summer coupled with strong vaccinations did achieve a degree of herd immunity in the UK that for now has left hospitalisations in a more manageable number for the winter. That's really good news for future winters and suggests the virus will be significantly more manageable generally.

Obviously it makes perfect sense to impose face mask restrictions whilst they're still trying to analyse the new strain. I'm impressed by how many people in London have gone back to wearing them when compliance was low towards the end previously. I really did think people would be completely against ever wearing them again after all restrictions were lifted but compliance is good when it needs to be so that's also reassuring.
cdd
Posts: 2607
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 14.05

gottago wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 12.58I'm impressed by how many people in London have gone back to wearing them when compliance was low towards the end previously.
How many people are properly wearing an effective mask? <50%, in my observation. I therefore think most people are indifferent.
cwathen
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

gottago wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 12.58
cwathen wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 10.36
cdd wrote: Fri 03 Dec, 2021 23.50 Oh goody. I’d missed this cheerful thread.
I was strongly against reimposing mandatory masks because, aside from it being demonstrably obvious that they don't do anything
Eh? That's not true at all. Where did you get that one from?
Lets start with something I imagine we do agree on - the impact of vaccination. The science and evidence behind the vaccines is visible in the results - hospitalisations and deaths are down against case rates which previously would have caused a much bigger problem. Without even viewing the science, you can see the vaccines work. That's why the anti-vax brigade need to rely on Uncle Jim's Reddit account to cite 'evidence' of their cause.

But when it comes to masks, mandatory wearing was first introduced in July 2020 and we were told this would deal with what, at the time, was a small uptick in cases. I thought it was worth a try, but it can't really be claimed that it worked can it? Cases surged anyway. It might be argued that without masks it would have been even worse, but there is no modelling I've seen to show that. But that argument too became academic when mask rules were dropped in July this year, and as you yourself note voluntary compliance dropped and dropped and was at pretty low levels even well into November. Yet the situation did not deteriorate without them and case rates have been bouncing around the same number for months. So can you explain based on the observable results what has been achieved by wearing masks and what has been lost without it? From the ground, it looks like they do nothing either way.

I haven't come presenting bollocks from Reddit showing masks not being effective, I've simply asked for the evidence those in favour of masks are relying on. It all seems to be nothing other than generic studies showing that face coverings have a utility (which is not in dispute), but I have not seen any peer-reviewed study showing how transmission is being prevented specifically of Covid, and specifically with the type of masks that are common (paper surgical masks and shop bought fabric masks made to no known technical standards seem to account for 99% of masks in use), and also the way in which they are being used (disposables being used multiple times, being handled, not fitted correctly etc etc). In this very thread I was once presented with no less than 8 pieces of 'evidence', some of them were interesting reads but none of them were that. Significantly, several of them found that face visors which are considered perfectly acceptable face coverings do pretty much diddly squat in terms of stopping cough particles in a lab test.

Possibly if we were all donning FFP3 masks (and using them properly) and no situations where the masks could be taken off when mixing were permitted (which I think is widely agreed isn't practical) there may be an impact on transmission, but we're not doing that and have never been asked to do that.

The argument that at worst they do nothing doesn't really hold when they are being mandated. I've no problem with anyone personally choosing to wear one either because they feel safer doing so or feel they are making others safer if that's what they believe, but mandating them constitutes a restriction. It might be a tiny restriction in itself, but it's now been shown 3 times that once we start on restrictions we will keep going until they achieve their aim because 'we rule nothing out' is still the principle being used. That's why I'm against them being mandated so much.
bilky asko
Posts: 1400
Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48

Well research, as always, marches on. Here's something more recent than the ones I posted before:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abi9069

The abstract for that ends "[m]ask distribution and promotion was a scalable and effective method to reduce symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections."

It particularly mentions surgical masks (which for some reason you've grouped in with cloth masks) as being effective. Indeed, there are reusable masks, such as the one I posted in the mask thread, that are certified as FFP2.

This is the gold standard level of evidence required to say that yes, wearing masks is effective. As Laura H. Kwong, one of the people involved in the study said in an article discussing it:

"So next time you are wondering if you should wear a mask, the answer is yes. Cloth masks are likely better than nothing, but high-quality surgical masks or masks with even higher filtration efficiency and better fit – such as KF94s, KN95s and N95s – are the most effective at preventing COVID-19."
Image
cwathen
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

bilky asko wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 17.49 Well research, as always, marches on. Here's something more recent than the ones I posted before:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abi9069
And as with the last lot you posted, I will read it. But whilst doing that, could you answer a simple question? Why is there no observable correlation on the ground between wearing masks or not vs what the spread of the virus is doing? Specifically:

1) Why did wearing masks from July 2020 have no effect on preventing a small uptick in cases ballooning into a second wave triggering drastic action when we were told masks would mitigate against that happening?

2) Why did a huge reduction in mask wearing once it became optional in July 2021, with voluntary wearing continuing to decline over the next 4 months not cause a spike in cases as a result of losing this apparent protection as those in favour of retaining a mask mandate said would happen?
james2001
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat 04 Jun, 2005 23.10

The re-introduction of pre-departure travel tests now in addition to the re-introduction of PCR tests. I'm wondering if the travel industry will ever properly recover at this rate, it's practically impossible to plan without knowing what the rules will be, or if you're going to be hit with significant extra costs through increased testing or isolation requirements while you're in the middle of your holiday and can't do anything about it.

We're meant to be going to Tenerife in June, after already having postponed it three times, I'm getting less and less confident we're going to make it with hope the test and masking mandates are gone by then. We'll probably just cancel outright rather than postpone again if we can't make it this time. Travel testing has become such a money making racket for Tory chums (why do they insist on having to use their "approved providers" rather than accept free NHS tests after all, even though they're the same tests) I wonder how easy it's going to be to get rid of it.
cwathen
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

james2001 wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 19.46 The re-introduction of pre-departure travel tests now. I'm wondering if the travel industry will ever properly recover at this rate, it's practically impossible to plan without knowing what the rules will be, or if you're going to be hit with significant extra costs through increased testing requirements.

We're meant to be going to Tenerife in June, after already having postponed it three times, I'm getting less and less confident we're going to make it with test and masking mandates gone by then.
As I said in the mask thread, the great mask debate (of which I'm guilty of falling into myself) is detracting from the introduction of travel restrictions which will cause further damage to an industry that can't afford it. The trouble with pre-departure tests specifically is that it introduces the possibility of being unable to leave the country you are in. But if you're going somewhere on holiday you've only secured your tenure for the duration of the holiday. People may not be able to afford an additional stay. That is infinitely worse than being required to self isolate at home. So they won't go. And this time there is no support available for the industry. It will never recover until lines start to be drawn on what will and won't be done in the name of fighting Covid.
james2001
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat 04 Jun, 2005 23.10

If it wasn't for my inability to wear masks, I'd be in the US this weekend, which means I'd have been facing a triple whammy of pre-departure tests, PCR testing on return and isolation, none of which were even in the equation even a week ago. It just shows that travelling isn't worth it right now, because you don't know how many unexpected costs you're going to face with testing, and possibly being stuck in the country and having find accomodation and rebook flights etc. So at the moment I feel glad I couldn't make it over there, however much I'm missing the people I was going over there to see. At times it starts to feel like pre-2019 international travel will never return. It's literally impossible to plan, even if testing requirements are removed and there's several months of calm you don't know if scariant hysteria may suddenly start up again and you may find yourself stranded abroad or facing extra costs of hundreds out of nowhere. Unless some assurance is given that this is well and truly over, the travel industry won't recover.

I remember when vaccinations were hailed as the thing that would get us out of this, but a year on we're still facing restrictions, endless testing and threats of future lockdowns. It seems that for far too many, the fact vaccines aren't 100% effective (even though nobody working on them ever claimed they would be) and the fact covid is still around is preventing a return to normality. Even normal and expected things like breakthrough infections and antibody waning are treated as major disasters and reasons why we can't live normal lives, even though the effects on reducing serious illness are clearly still holding up.

One thing that's disapointing is Labour supporting all this increased travel testing seeing as their supporters are going to be the least likely to be able to take the hit from the extra costs.
User avatar
Pete
Posts: 7589
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.36
Location: Dundee

I am very bored of masks. But I am also very bored of mask discourse.

Sigh.
"He has to be larger than bacon"
User avatar
Finn
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun 06 Nov, 2005 17.02
Location: Manchester

cwathen wrote: Sat 04 Dec, 2021 10.36 I was strongly against reimposing mandatory masks because, aside from it being demonstrably obvious that they don't do anything, they are a restriction.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2776536

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-07-08-ox ... rk-act-now

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118#sec-22

(for example)
Locked