Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Can anyone explain the weird politics of mask-wearing? – politicalbetting.com

1356789

Comments

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,483
    DavidL said:

    tlg86 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The vanishing university
    From Oxford to Edinburgh, Bristol to Liverpool, the story is the same: online interaction is here to stay
    Andrew Tettenborn"

    https://thecritic.co.uk/the-vanishing-university/

    I donate to my Oxford college and the other night I got a call from a law undergrad wanting to know how I was getting on. I asked him if they were going to get the full Oxford experience this term (i.e. in person lectures and tutorials) and he said yes.
    All my teaching this semester is in person. We will be recording lectures when we do them and they will be available to students who didn’t or couldn’t attend, but this has been common for years. Have some pity for older academics faced with 200 students in a lecture theatre. There is still risks for Covid, even after double vaccination.
    Think of the promotion opportunities.
    "A bloody war or a sickly season", used to be the Thursday toast in the officers' messtable in the RN.
  • dixiedean said:

    Live and uninterrupted golf on 5LSX.
    So what's on regular 5Live? The usual sports report of all the football reports and other sport?
    Nope. Live golf as well.

    Harrington must go down as one of the worst Ryder Cup Captains ever both in his "mate" selections and picks for the forursomes and fourballs
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190

    Big news: after the government conceded a judicial review application which I am acting in (see above) the hardship scheme is now in place so that people who cannot afford hotel quarantine can have fees waived or reduced

    https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1441796929281609737?s=20

    I guess the next fight will be over whether journeys were necessary against FCO advice....

    It would be nice if SKS called out this nonsense.
  • dixiedean said:

    Live and uninterrupted golf on 5LSX.
    So what's on regular 5Live? The usual sports report of all the football reports and other sport?
    Nope. Live golf as well.

    Europe are getting roasted
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190

    dixiedean said:

    Live and uninterrupted golf on 5LSX.
    So what's on regular 5Live? The usual sports report of all the football reports and other sport?
    Nope. Live golf as well.

    Harrington must go down as one of the worst Ryder Cup Captains ever both in his "mate" selections and picks for the forursomes and fourballs
    The only odd decision was not playing Garcia yesterday afternoon.

    Were Lowry and Poulter bad picks? I can see why he went with Lowry over Rose, but it's close. Would have been brave to leave out Poulter.

    Ultimately the Americans have played better. The captains can make the difference when it's close. This isn't close.
  • tlg86 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Live and uninterrupted golf on 5LSX.
    So what's on regular 5Live? The usual sports report of all the football reports and other sport?
    Nope. Live golf as well.

    Harrington must go down as one of the worst Ryder Cup Captains ever both in his "mate" selections and picks for the forursomes and fourballs
    The only odd decision was not playing Garcia yesterday afternoon.

    Were Lowry and Poulter bad picks? I can see why he went with Lowry over Rose, but it's close. Would have been brave to leave out Poulter.

    Ultimately the Americans have played better. The captains can make the difference when it's close. This isn't close.
    And a very partisan US crowd
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    Ryder Cup captains always get it in the neck. Nick Faldo was vilified by our press (they were delighted we lost). But he got it in the neck for picking his mate from Hertfordshire. Of course, his mate from Hertfordshire did rather well...
  • MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    So you lot are telling me that when I come to Oxford, London, York and the Lake District for 10 days starting Friday many people are going to be wandering around inside without masks? I find that slightly concerning to be honest.

    Yes, masks are pretty much done in London. I'd guess at about 30% of people wearing them indoors in supermarkets. Maybe a bit more on the tube. In pubs or any social venues it's zero.
    As high as 30%?

    I'd say ~10-16% in my local ones.

    Just spent a few hours at Trafford and it was extremely busy with less than 1% mask prevalence there. Which is almost completely back to how it was pre-pandemic.

    Its fantastic to see normality return and I worry for those areas which haven't embraced normality over the summer. What's the plan for them now? Return to normal over the winter - or live with restrictions and masks until summer next year?
  • Le Huff:

    President Macron spoke yesterday to PM Johnson, at the latter's request. Mr Johnson expressed his intention to restore cooperation between 🇲🇫 and 🇬🇧, in line with our values and our common interests (the climate, the Indo-Pacific region, the fight against terrorism, etc.)……

    The President replied that he was awaiting his suggestions.


    https://twitter.com/franceintheuk/status/1441792309159514113?s=21

    A long wait then.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,496
    .

    Lots of petrol stations out of fuel in Northumberland it seems

    Same in Cardiff and the Vale-no queues though!
  • Most people on the Northern Line were wearing masks (jncluding yours truly) when I checked out the brand new Battersea and Nine Elms tube stations on Tuesday.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 18,196
    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,043
    Local fuel stations empty. Buying milk and eggs it was interesting to hear Boris mentioned ahead in the queue. ‘Doesn’t live in the real world’ apparently.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 5,228
    edited September 2021
    Jonathan said:

    Local fuel stations empty. Buying milk and eggs it was interesting to hear Boris mentioned ahead in the queue. ‘Doesn’t live in the real world’ apparently.

    Yes, the irritation is widespread. From a couple of of my most Tory relatives to the young urbanites, speaking to people this weekend he's definitely going to take a hit.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,403
    theProle said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    One of the reasons I think masks are a poor idea is because we probably want everyone to catch this ASAP before waning immunity catches up with us. Reducing transmission with delta is just delaying everyone catching it. With alpha we were in a position where we could prevent 80% of people getting COVID. With delta that number is basically zero. It's better for them to get it within the first 12 weeks after they are fully vaccinated or after their booster shot for older people.

    Personally if I were susceptible to getting COVID, I'd want it now, not in December months after my Pfizer immunity had waned and the NHS was going through its annual winter crisis.

    I am 60 and double jabbed and I don't want to catch covid. We took an aged auntie out for lunch who was 90, (auntie not the lunch), she has been double jabbed but nothing is 100% for either of us. I don't want to be responsible for infecting her so we wore masks in the car and whilst walking to the table in the restaurant. Obviously we took the masks off to eat, but we were a good metre apart. (We live in Wales btw). Everyone in the restaurant was obeying the rules.
    I don't think those precautions would make much difference to be honest. If one you has it, you'll likely pass it on to the other.
    That's the all-or-nothing myth. Catching Covid isn't like being pregnant. Viral load is an important factor. In a few cases it can make the difference between serious illness and mild.
    It still really is better to be wearing masks when you can, it can save someone's life.
    I was thinking more about the not wearing a mask when you're sitting down facing each other. What's the point of wearing a mask for the car ride?
    Enclosed space, lots of recycling going on. The more virus you breathe in, the more likely you are to get seriously ill.
    Maybe, but if you're worried about it, why go in a car together?
    Again with the all-or-nothing fallacy. Some people have a risk appetite that sits in that space between hermitage and orgy.
    People wear seatbelts to lower the chances of nasty outcomes, but still take the chance of getting in the car in the first place. This is similar, in some ways.
    I think vaccinations are much more similar to seatbelts.

    Personally I'm sceptical about how much difference masks make. If wearing masks makes people feel that bit safer, then that's absolutely fine. But I suspect they don't make much difference and you won't get me wearing one unless absolutely forced to (in a hospital, for example).
    Is your scepticism rooted in scientific evidence, a gut instinct, or something else?
    Well, people were weren't wearing masks at the start of COVID and we got cases down through lockdown. Then masks came in and cases went up in the autumn.

    Now, maybe cases would have come down faster with masks and gone up faster without them, but the reality is, they don't make much difference. And I think they don't make much difference partly because people only wear them in certain situations. So to go back to the start of this, I think not wearing them in the pub/restaurant makes wearing them in the car pointless.
    That was a lot of words for "gut instinct".
    Don't be afraid of admitting you have an opinion that's not scientifically based. We all do about something or other.
    Nope. My words were facts.

    I'm a logical thinker. My view on the visit to the pub with the 90 year old relative is:

    Masks in car might reduce the chance of passing on COVID by 50%.

    But not wearing a mask when seated in the pub means that if one of you has it, there's probably a 95% chance of passing it on.

    So wearing a mask in only the car might reduce the chance of transmission by 2.5%.

    And I think I'm being generous with those percentages.
    You're a logical thinker... but you keep coming back to the same error: viral load is important. It's not just the chance of infection yes/no that you need to think about, it's also how serious the infection is. Covid is analogue, not digital.

    It's like driving up a residential street at 60mph, and reasoning that it's the same risk as driving at 31mph, because both are above the limit.
    Is there much evidence that viral load matters?
    Given that there was a lot of household transmission during lockdowns, where one person caught it outside the home, and then the rest of the household were cooped up with them, you would expect an obvious trend where those who got ill through household transmission got it much worse than those who got ill outside the home, given that within the home, viral loads are almost certainly going to be much higher. The fact that no such trend was obvious suggests it doesn't make a lot of difference.
    It's a well known characteristic of viruses generally, and the reason is that the way viruses work is that they hijack your cells, and use them to churn out more copies of themselves. The more of your own bodies cells are pumping out Covid, the longer it takes for the immune system to catch up - even with vaccines.

    From a Covid specific point of view, the problem, of course, is calculating how great the initial exposure of the virus is.

    Fortunately, there have been a number of proxy studies, almost all looking at hospital settings, where one patient in hospital was infected, and they looked at those who caught the disease from the initial patient, and how sick they got. Those closest to patient zero were more likely to catch it, and were more likely to get really sick than those further away.
  • .

    Lots of petrol stations out of fuel in Northumberland it seems

    Same in Cardiff and the Vale-no queues though!
    Just cycles past my local Mossies petrol station. They were no queues there - apparently because the word had got around on the grapevine that there was no fuel!

    According to the rumour mill 13k of diesel along sold since 6am before they ran out. I've no idea how much that compares to usual.
  • theProle said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    One of the reasons I think masks are a poor idea is because we probably want everyone to catch this ASAP before waning immunity catches up with us. Reducing transmission with delta is just delaying everyone catching it. With alpha we were in a position where we could prevent 80% of people getting COVID. With delta that number is basically zero. It's better for them to get it within the first 12 weeks after they are fully vaccinated or after their booster shot for older people.

    Personally if I were susceptible to getting COVID, I'd want it now, not in December months after my Pfizer immunity had waned and the NHS was going through its annual winter crisis.

    I am 60 and double jabbed and I don't want to catch covid. We took an aged auntie out for lunch who was 90, (auntie not the lunch), she has been double jabbed but nothing is 100% for either of us. I don't want to be responsible for infecting her so we wore masks in the car and whilst walking to the table in the restaurant. Obviously we took the masks off to eat, but we were a good metre apart. (We live in Wales btw). Everyone in the restaurant was obeying the rules.
    I don't think those precautions would make much difference to be honest. If one you has it, you'll likely pass it on to the other.
    That's the all-or-nothing myth. Catching Covid isn't like being pregnant. Viral load is an important factor. In a few cases it can make the difference between serious illness and mild.
    It still really is better to be wearing masks when you can, it can save someone's life.
    I was thinking more about the not wearing a mask when you're sitting down facing each other. What's the point of wearing a mask for the car ride?
    Enclosed space, lots of recycling going on. The more virus you breathe in, the more likely you are to get seriously ill.
    Maybe, but if you're worried about it, why go in a car together?
    Again with the all-or-nothing fallacy. Some people have a risk appetite that sits in that space between hermitage and orgy.
    People wear seatbelts to lower the chances of nasty outcomes, but still take the chance of getting in the car in the first place. This is similar, in some ways.
    I think vaccinations are much more similar to seatbelts.

    Personally I'm sceptical about how much difference masks make. If wearing masks makes people feel that bit safer, then that's absolutely fine. But I suspect they don't make much difference and you won't get me wearing one unless absolutely forced to (in a hospital, for example).
    Is your scepticism rooted in scientific evidence, a gut instinct, or something else?
    Well, people were weren't wearing masks at the start of COVID and we got cases down through lockdown. Then masks came in and cases went up in the autumn.

    Now, maybe cases would have come down faster with masks and gone up faster without them, but the reality is, they don't make much difference. And I think they don't make much difference partly because people only wear them in certain situations. So to go back to the start of this, I think not wearing them in the pub/restaurant makes wearing them in the car pointless.
    That was a lot of words for "gut instinct".
    Don't be afraid of admitting you have an opinion that's not scientifically based. We all do about something or other.
    Nope. My words were facts.

    I'm a logical thinker. My view on the visit to the pub with the 90 year old relative is:

    Masks in car might reduce the chance of passing on COVID by 50%.

    But not wearing a mask when seated in the pub means that if one of you has it, there's probably a 95% chance of passing it on.

    So wearing a mask in only the car might reduce the chance of transmission by 2.5%.

    And I think I'm being generous with those percentages.
    You're a logical thinker... but you keep coming back to the same error: viral load is important. It's not just the chance of infection yes/no that you need to think about, it's also how serious the infection is. Covid is analogue, not digital.

    It's like driving up a residential street at 60mph, and reasoning that it's the same risk as driving at 31mph, because both are above the limit.
    Is there much evidence that viral load matters?
    Given that there was a lot of household transmission during lockdowns, where one person caught it outside the home, and then the rest of the household were cooped up with them, you would expect an obvious trend where those who got ill through household transmission got it much worse than those who got ill outside the home, given that within the home, viral loads are almost certainly going to be much higher. The fact that no such trend was obvious suggests it doesn't make a lot of difference.
    Yes there's a lot of evidence and yes in the first wave especially it was noticeable that those who caught it in the household got more sick than those who had first caught it and brought it to the household.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,496

    .

    Lots of petrol stations out of fuel in Northumberland it seems

    Same in Cardiff and the Vale-no queues though!
    Just cycles past my local Mossies petrol station. They were no queues there - apparently because the word had got around on the grapevine that there was no fuel!

    According to the rumour mill 13k of diesel along sold since 6am before they ran out. I've no idea how much that compares to usual.
    My tongue was firmly in cheek!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 18,196
    UK motorists face queues and closures at petrol stations https://on.ft.com/3AH5kyl
  • Jonathan said:

    Local fuel stations empty. Buying milk and eggs it was interesting to hear Boris mentioned ahead in the queue. ‘Doesn’t live in the real world’ apparently.

    Yes, the irritation is widespread. From a couple of of my most Tory relatives to the young urbanites, speaking to people this weekend he's definitely going to take a hit.
    He went after the French last week, so it will be probably be the turn of the BBC to be next weeks recovery scapegoat. Gives him an early chance to play the Dorries card and get the left to say something stupid about her too.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    ...
    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
  • isam said:

    ...

    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
    According to @Scott_P this is his life's work

    And Brentford have just scored v Liverpool
  • timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2021

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    Precisely.

    Its pure gesturism. So yes the political divide is well understood.

    Vaccines work. FFP3 masks work. Cloth masks are a gesture.

    Its well past time to get back to normal and if the antivaxxers get it, the sooner the better.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,386

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
  • isam said:

    ...

    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
    According to @Scott_P this is his life's work

    And Brentford have just scored v Liverpool
    Liverpool have equalised. 🔴
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    Imagine you were able to drive 10 million miles. If you did that, there would be a good chance that you would be killed or seriously injured. Thankfully, most of us don't drive quite so much so the risk isn't that high. But, of course, law averages means that some of us get unlucky (okay, driving standards matter, but you can be in the wrong place at the wrong time and we are all capable of ****ing up no matter how good we think we might be).

    Unless someone is locking themselves away, they will come into contact with COVID at some point in the next year. It is like we are driving 10s of millions of miles in the next year or so.
  • isam said:

    ...

    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
    According to @Scott_P this is his life's work

    And Brentford have just scored v Liverpool
    Liverpool have equalised. 🔴
    Good game
  • So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,403
    Just FYI:

    Los Angeles Unified School District (as well as pretty much all the private schools in LA), are now requiring (12+) children to be vaccinated.

    The reason is not so much the absolute risk of people getting sick, but more the disruption that comes from schools having massive testing infrastructures and having to cancel lessons and move to online learning.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,483

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    Precisely.

    Its pure gesturism. So yes the political divide is well understood.

    Vaccines work. FFP3 masks work. Cloth masks are a gesture.

    Its well past time to get back to normal and if the antivaxxers get it, the sooner the better.
    There's been evidence presented that cloith masks work - here on PB, today - and you are still denying it?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,440

    On topic: because Tory MPs are ignorant, selfish bastards, and they want to virtue signal to the ignorant, selfish bastards who vote for them?

    I don’t see not wearing masks as virtue signalling tbh.
    Of course it is. It is saying "look at me, I am an individual, I won't be told what to do by the nanny state. I don't believe in rules and neither should you."
    Touch of preciousness too in places. Eg one imagines Neil Oliver striding into Specsavers to pick up a new pair of bifocals:

    "Sorry, sir, our Covid protocols require a mask. Do you have one?"
    "I do not."
    "Ah ok, no problem, we have a stock. I'll just get you one."
    "You will not. I wear no mask. My face looks full and free upon the world."
    "It'll only take a -"
    "No. Those who would sacrifice a little liberty to get into Specsavers deserve neither liberty nor to get into Specsavers."
    "I thought you did want to come in."
    "Well now I don't."
    "I see. What should we do about your glasses then?"
    "I do not care you pettyfogging nonentity."

    This sort of thing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 56,575

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    Why not just look at the actual studies done on the effectiveness of masks?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,483
    geoffw said:

    Out bowling today and wife insisted I mask up. Only one other player on the green (out of 26) was masked. Proper queered my pitch as my glasses got steamed up. We lost.

    My point in this feeble anecdote is that the people concerned are not just the mask wearers and those they encounter but also the people in their respective bubbles. Asymptomatic infection and transmission is a right bugger. So in addition to vaccination we need effective treatments for people who do catch it so that everyone can feel safe. I think only then will mask wearing subside.

    I liked the anecdote for its originality!
  • Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,403

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    There have been lots of empirical studies of mask effectiveness, using far, far, far larger sample sizes than a couple of hundred (vaccinated) people.

    My guess, fwiw, is that there will be no cases of Covid in the HoC. Everyone will be double vaccinated. And everyone will be regularly tested.

    But it also misses the big point. Masks exist to stop you spreading the disease to others. You wear a mask for the same reason a surgeon wears a mask - to stop you from spreading viral matter.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,115

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    Not a particularly large sample. Nor under control conditions.
    Folk are very exercised about this. It is a choice.
  • Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    rcs1000 said:

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    There have been lots of empirical studies of mask effectiveness, using far, far, far larger sample sizes than a couple of hundred (vaccinated) people.

    My guess, fwiw, is that there will be no cases of Covid in the HoC. Everyone will be double vaccinated. And everyone will be regularly tested.

    But it also misses the big point. Masks exist to stop you spreading the disease to others. You wear a mask for the same reason a surgeon wears a mask - to stop you from spreading viral matter.

    I'm sorry, but that last bit is bollocks. Surgeons were wearing masks pre-COVID. Unless you think we should all wear masks all of the time forever more, that's a terrible analogy.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
    How many people are there who can't have the vaccine, and who we therefore need to wear masks for? And for how long must we continue to wear them?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,707
    edited September 2021
    isam said:

    ...

    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
    The Brexit vote was *largely* a reaction against the establishment. This reaction came from primarily the (white) working class who to a certain degree (maybe justifiably) felt unloved. I mention certain because as with all things in life there is some level of self responsibility that needs to be considered. Take educational aspiration and attainment - this is exceptionally low within the white working class when compared to the immigrant working class. This is luckily beginning to change in London as the immigrant working class lift the white working class from the bottom. The feeling of being at the bottom is of course very un-empowering and leads to the feeling that immigrants are coming here taking jobs and stealing opportunities. There has to be a massive *cultural* shift (I fear very little can be done at the policy maker's level) within the white working class for this to change.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    murali_s said:

    isam said:

    ...

    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
    The Brexit vote was *largely* a reaction against the establishment. This reaction came from primarily the (white) working class who to a certain degree (maybe justifiably) felt unloved. I mention certain because as with all things in life there is some level of self responsibility that needs to be considered. Take educational aspiration and attainment - this is exceptionally low within the white working class when compared to the immigrant working class. This is luckily beginning to change in London as the immigrant working class lift the white working class from the bottom. The feeling of being at the bottom is of course very un-empowering and leads to the feeling that immigrants are coming here taking jobs and stealing opportunities. There has to be a massive *cultural* shift (I fear very little can be done at the policy maker's level) within the white working class for this to change.
    Oh I see, nice one
  • Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
    In which case if not now, then when?

    We've stopped wearing masks over the summer and it's been a great success. But if you're against dropping them in the summer do you propose the autumn? Winter? Next year? Next summer?

    Can you put a date on it? Or a threshold?
  • rcs1000 said:

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    There have been lots of empirical studies of mask effectiveness, using far, far, far larger sample sizes than a couple of hundred (vaccinated) people.

    My guess, fwiw, is that there will be no cases of Covid in the HoC. Everyone will be double vaccinated. And everyone will be regularly tested.

    But it also misses the big point. Masks exist to stop you spreading the disease to others. You wear a mask for the same reason a surgeon wears a mask - to stop you from spreading viral matter.

    The chances of myself, having been previously infected and also fully vaccinated, of spreading viral matter is close to zero.

    If I happen to do so then it would be as such minimal levels that the risk to another fully vaccinated person would be even closer to zero.

    In fact it would be far more likely to give them the equivalent of a free booster shot.

    If I happen to shed some virus and an anti-vaxxer gets infected then that's the risk they've chosen to take and quite frankly the sooner all the anti-vaxxers get infected the sooner things get back to normal.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,677

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
    At present, about 1/70 people have covid. We know that it is most infectious in its pre-symptomatic phase and that the numbers who have it are fairly evenly divided between vaxxed and unvaxxed. So there is at present a significant risk. Perhaps several MPs have it at any moment, but we cannot simply compare sides of the house as MPs are in contact in many other places with many other people.

    If the numbers were a tenth of current numbers, then the balance would be different, and if a hundredth then much less, but they are not.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 12,507
    edited September 2021
    rcs1000 said:

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    There have been lots of empirical studies of mask effectiveness, using far, far, far larger sample sizes than a couple of hundred (vaccinated) people.

    My guess, fwiw, is that there will be no cases of Covid in the HoC. Everyone will be double vaccinated. And everyone will be regularly tested.

    But it also misses the big point. Masks exist to stop you spreading the disease to others. You wear a mask for the same reason a surgeon wears a mask - to stop you from spreading viral matter.

    Who would trust their MP to accurately take and report an LFT test? If they have to do it, and are allowed to self administer I bet at least a quarter of them don't bother taking it and just report negative so that it shows on the NHS app.

    In the general population I would guess that number around 10-20% but MPs are especially entitled and consider themselves far too important to worry about such things.
  • dixiedean said:

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    Not a particularly large sample. Nor under control conditions.
    Folk are very exercised about this. It is a choice.
    Rational choice is good.

    Irrational posturing isn't.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,386

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I didn't even say anybody should wear a mask now, let alone forever. Stop screeching and sit down.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 24,889
    edited September 2021

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
    If not now then when? As I said earlier it looks to me that this is about as good as it will ever get. If you are proposing the continuation of restrictions now then you are pretty much, ipso facto, saying they will be permanent.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 1,257
    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    Imagine you were able to drive 10 million miles. If you did that, there would be a good chance that you would be killed or seriously injured. Thankfully, most of us don't drive quite so much so the risk isn't that high. But, of course, law averages means that some of us get unlucky (okay, driving standards matter, but you can be in the wrong place at the wrong time and we are all capable of ****ing up no matter how good we think we might be).

    Unless someone is locking themselves away, they will come into contact with COVID at some point in the next year. It is like we are driving 10s of millions of miles in the next year or so.
    Just as a sort of pedantic/trivial point, the driving stats aren't as bad as this. My understanding of the bar for being killed or seriously injured (KSI) is in patient hospitalisation. I have already had a KSI whilst cycling, hit a pothole at about 40 mph and broke my arm requiring surgery under general anaesthetic. You really need to look at the stats for people being killed, as seriously injured is not necessarily a life changing event based on this experience. And the reality is that the number of deaths compared to driving miles are miniscule, even in the case of motorcycling, which I also do despite people telling me I am completely crazy.
  • Sky suggesting Merkel may still be Chancellor for some time to come
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 9,565
    edited September 2021

    Jonathan said:

    Local fuel stations empty. Buying milk and eggs it was interesting to hear Boris mentioned ahead in the queue. ‘Doesn’t live in the real world’ apparently.

    Yes, the irritation is widespread. From a couple of of my most Tory relatives to the young urbanites, speaking to people this weekend he's definitely going to take a hit.
    He went after the French last week, so it will be probably be the turn of the BBC to be next weeks recovery scapegoat. Gives him an early chance to play the Dorries card and get the left to say something stupid about her too.
    Noticeable shortages here in largely Covid-free Cheltenham. No diesel available but some petrol and motorists queuing mostly patiently. (Well there were one or two other noisy impatient bastards as well as me, but most drivers were being pretty civilised.)

    More surprising were the ominous shortages in Waitrose. No muesli dog biscuits, ffs.

    The border collie is not best pleased.
  • Sky suggesting Merkel may still be Chancellor for some time to come

    Yes, she'll remain in office while a new coalition is negotiated after the election. Even if the result is clear that will take some time.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 1,257
    edited September 2021
    isam said:

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
    How many people are there who can't have the vaccine, and who we therefore need to wear masks for? And for how long must we continue to wear them?
    And why is large scale societal intervention justified for this group, and not for others?

    IE: we still permit nuts, but some people have extreme nut allergies.
  • Sky suggesting Merkel may still be Chancellor for some time to come

    She did say that when she went it would be boring, and so it would appear.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,302
    rcs1000 said:

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    There have been lots of empirical studies of mask effectiveness, using far, far, far larger sample sizes than a couple of hundred (vaccinated) people.

    My guess, fwiw, is that there will be no cases of Covid in the HoC. Everyone will be double vaccinated. And everyone will be regularly tested.

    But it also misses the big point. Masks exist to stop you spreading the disease to others. You wear a mask for the same reason a surgeon wears a mask - to stop you from spreading viral matter.

    The real question that you're not thinking about - why should we stop the spread of COVID now that 90% of the nation's adults are vaccinated? COVID is endemic, we aren't going to eradicate it so let's just live with it.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,115

    dixiedean said:

    So if Conservative MPs aren't wearing masks but other MPs are then what is the comparative rate of covid infection of the two groups since parliament returned ?

    If its similar then masks are proven pointless.

    Not a particularly large sample. Nor under control conditions.
    Folk are very exercised about this. It is a choice.
    Rational choice is good.

    Irrational posturing isn't.
    But one person's rational choice is another's irrational posturing.
    In truth, it is an emotional choice. There is no right or wrong answer. Like wearing a hat or not.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,403
    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,302

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    So you think everyone should wear a mask forever just in case they might happen to be shedding virus and be close to someone vulnerable.

    Are there any other health and safety restrictions you would like to enforce ?
    I do have to goggle at the absurd absolutism. Nobody is proposing masks forever
    Ok, so in your view when should we dump them? Is it based in infections? Is it based on hospitalisation? What's the trigger point from saying "these are necessary" to saying "actually we don't need them".
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 6,805

    Jonathan said:

    Local fuel stations empty. Buying milk and eggs it was interesting to hear Boris mentioned ahead in the queue. ‘Doesn’t live in the real world’ apparently.

    Yes, the irritation is widespread. From a couple of of my most Tory relatives to the young urbanites, speaking to people this weekend he's definitely going to take a hit.
    He went after the French last week, so it will be probably be the turn of the BBC to be next weeks recovery scapegoat. Gives him an early chance to play the Dorries card and get the left to say something stupid about her too.
    Noticeable shortages here in largely Covid-free Cheltenham. No diesel available but some petrol and motorists queuing mostly patiently. (Well there were one or two other noisy impatient bastards as well as me, but most drivers were being pretty civilised.)

    More surprising were the ominous shortages in Waitrose. No muesli dog biscuits, ffs.

    The border collie is not best pleased.
    Are you annoyed about the dog biscuits too? :)
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    Surely the question is, "what problem are we trying to solve?"

    I'm not clear as to what problem masks are supposed to solve.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,115
    darkage said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    And those who can't have the vaccine, and those for whom the vaccine doesn't work.
    Imagine you were able to drive 10 million miles. If you did that, there would be a good chance that you would be killed or seriously injured. Thankfully, most of us don't drive quite so much so the risk isn't that high. But, of course, law averages means that some of us get unlucky (okay, driving standards matter, but you can be in the wrong place at the wrong time and we are all capable of ****ing up no matter how good we think we might be).

    Unless someone is locking themselves away, they will come into contact with COVID at some point in the next year. It is like we are driving 10s of millions of miles in the next year or so.
    Just as a sort of pedantic/trivial point, the driving stats aren't as bad as this. My understanding of the bar for being killed or seriously injured (KSI) is in patient hospitalisation. I have already had a KSI whilst cycling, hit a pothole at about 40 mph and broke my arm requiring surgery under general anaesthetic. You really need to look at the stats for people being killed, as seriously injured is not necessarily a life changing event based on this experience. And the reality is that the number of deaths compared to driving miles are miniscule, even in the case of motorcycling, which I also do despite people telling me I am completely crazy.
    My KSI's consist of falling down stairs, playing rugby and beaten up by a jealous boyfriend.
    Motorcycling completely safe.
    But I wouldn't go in a helicopter no matter how much you paid me. These things are not provable conclusively by stats.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,302
    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,115
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Good question.
    Is there an official government aim re covid at the moment? I'm not aware of an explicit one.
  • dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Good question.
    Is there an official government aim re covid at the moment? I'm not aware of an explicit one.
    There is an aim. Get everyone who is allowed to under the JCVI recommendations vaccinated and then booster vaccinated.
  • murali_s said:

    isam said:

    ...

    Scott_xP said:

    Does this guy read PB?

    Waiting for the first Brexiter to give the hottest take that turning off and on immigrant workers as needed was really what Brexit was all about.

    Bonus prizes for the ones saying it that three weeks ago were stressing it was actually long term pay increases in specific sectors.


    https://twitter.com/AlexLeoPhillips/status/1441747851848126467

    Well it is both, so I will happily claim the prize

    Are you going to open the door and show me a goat or a car?
    There has to be a massive *cultural* shift (I fear very little can be done at the policy maker's level) within the white working class for this to change.
    the people....Had forfeited the confidence of the government... Would it not in that case be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,386
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 38,102
    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,386
    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
  • VAR working perfectly there. I wonder if @TheScreamingEagles is happier with VAR today? Salah onside goal wrongly ruled offside, VAR overturns and gives the goal.

    Brentford 1 - 2 Liverpool 🔴🔴
  • IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
  • Carnyx said:

    timple said:

    I think its well understood that the main reason to wear a mask is not to protect yourself - its to protect others so when you cough or sneeze you don't send a plume of virus into the vicinity. You may be asymptomatic - but for others it can kill them - truly a virus of our times.

    If you accept that the political divide is well understood.

    Who are you supposed to be protecting ?

    Anti-vaxxers ?
    Precisely.

    Its pure gesturism. So yes the political divide is well understood.

    Vaccines work. FFP3 masks work. Cloth masks are a gesture.

    Its well past time to get back to normal and if the antivaxxers get it, the sooner the better.
    There's been evidence presented that cloith masks work - here on PB, today - and you are still denying it?
    I've been out most of the day so not seen that so-called "evidence" sorry but yes I absolutely do.

    Vaccines work. Antivaxxers need to get their antibodies via infection. The rest is just gibberish.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Better to get COVID out of the way now before flu takes off in Dec-Apr.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 38,102

    IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
    It must be wonderful to be so open minded.
  • Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Massively better as despite protestations of health workers that they're "stretched" right now, we know full well that it will be worse in the winter.

    So get it over and done with now rather than in the winter.

    Prevarication and postponing the infections to the winter is the worst possible idea.
  • Regarding those unable to be jabbed for medical reasons, FFP3 masks will protect them. No reason for the other 99% of the population to wear a face covering.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 56,575
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
    It must be wonderful to be so open minded.
    Is that a comment about Freedland? If it was "entirely because of Brexit and nothing else", why are similar issues occurring in other countries?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,302
    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    There's one every winter. This will be no exception. Maybe worse given lower latent immunity to flu. If the scientists haven't picked the right strains for the flu jab then it could be a really bad winter.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,386
    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Better to get COVID out of the way now before flu takes off in Dec-Apr.
    You're not quite saying the thing that underpins the logic of this argument: that having Covid burn through the population will add strain on the NHS. That's the logic, isn't it? Spread the strain out over 6 months instead of 4. Have people dying in hospital now instead of in January.
    It's that acknowledgement that having Covid spread wide will kill people, that's what I'm after. Because it's true, isn't it?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,302
    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Because natural immunity seems to be absolutely brilliant at preventing reinfection. Especially among people who get it after being vaccinated. Someone who gets it now is almost certainly someone who is not going to get it in December.
  • IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
    It must be wonderful to be so open minded.
    Beats being empty-headed!
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 33,302
    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Better to get COVID out of the way now before flu takes off in Dec-Apr.
    You're not quite saying the thing that underpins the logic of this argument: that having Covid burn through the population will add strain on the NHS. That's the logic, isn't it? Spread the strain out over 6 months instead of 4. Have people dying in hospital now instead of in January.
    It's that acknowledgement that having Covid spread wide will kill people, that's what I'm after. Because it's true, isn't it?
    So what if it is? Everyone in the country is going to get it. You're looking for some idiotic gotcha moment but none of us are politicians and you aren't Robert Peston. At least I hope you aren't.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,518
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
    It must be wonderful to be so open minded.
    It must be wonderful to be so careless of the truth that you quote that snippet as if it were a summary of the piece. Actually it's a "turkey supplier from Essex" quoted within the piece; the author himself says that "Of course, [brexit]’s not the sole explanation" which is the sort of the, you know, what's the word, opposite.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,190
    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Better to get COVID out of the way now before flu takes off in Dec-Apr.
    You're not quite saying the thing that underpins the logic of this argument: that having Covid burn through the population will add strain on the NHS. That's the logic, isn't it? Spread the strain out over 6 months instead of 4. Have people dying in hospital now instead of in January.
    It's that acknowledgement that having Covid spread wide will kill people, that's what I'm after. Because it's true, isn't it?
    Well, ummm, yes. Especially those who have chosen not to get vaccinated.
  • Regarding those unable to be jabbed for medical reasons, FFP3 masks will protect them. No reason for the other 99% of the population to wear a face covering.

    Precisely. Anyone unable to get jabbed or who is seriously concerned should wear a real mask not a cloth one.

    If someone wears a cloth mask and that prevents an antivaxxer from getting infected now, resulting in the antivaxxer getting infected in the winter instead, then that's a bad thing for them and for society.

    So best case cloth masks are useless, worst case they are completely counterproductive.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 5,228
    edited September 2021
    I'm not sure that that article can be described as empty-headed, in any way. To a certain extent it simply lays out an unsurprising but important fact, that many of the current issues are related to Brexit, and that the British political and media class have merely become nervous of describing this head-on.
  • What a game!

    Brentford 2 - 3 Liverpool 🔴🔴🔴
  • IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
    The article is fair enough from a remain audience but throughout the desire exists of wanting cheap EU labour which as we know depresses wages

    The number of EU drivers going home is 14,000 and of course they would help, but ultimately we have to train our workforce and pay higher wages

    I expect Boris will take a hit, but just at the time a labour party should be trending high in the polls they are publicly arguing over internal issues of no interest to the voter who wants an electable opposition
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,713
    The key thing is all the main parties are committed to getting people double vaccinated and the vast majority of MPs across the chamber have been double vaccinated.

    Once you have been double jabbed it should be more personal choice if you want to wear a mask in the indoor space of the Commons, it is no surprise Labour MPs are more strict on mask wearing while Conservative MPs take a more relaxed view after vaccination as Labour is more the party of top down state direction and mandates
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 3,386
    MaxPB said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Better to get COVID out of the way now before flu takes off in Dec-Apr.
    You're not quite saying the thing that underpins the logic of this argument: that having Covid burn through the population will add strain on the NHS. That's the logic, isn't it? Spread the strain out over 6 months instead of 4. Have people dying in hospital now instead of in January.
    It's that acknowledgement that having Covid spread wide will kill people, that's what I'm after. Because it's true, isn't it?
    So what if it is? Everyone in the country is going to get it. You're looking for some idiotic gotcha moment but none of us are politicians and you aren't Robert Peston. At least I hope you aren't.
    I'm not after a gotcha, I'm just checking that you're advocating what I think you're advocating.
    There are other things you could advocate to prevent strain on the NHS. I'll just note that masks also help prevent the spread of flu. Some people might like the idea of saving lives lost to both Covid and flu. And perhaps better planning and money for the NHS to cope with what appears to be a predictable time of difficulty. There are different ways forward.
  • Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    tlg86 said:

    Farooq said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    This is a very odd discussion.

    We shouldn't be asking do masks work?

    We should be asking given where we are with vaccinations and antibodies, why do we need extensive restrictions?

    My gut - and it's just a gut - is that the only remaining defensible mask requirement is on public transport. (And, if we're honest, only really when it's busy. The problem is that that is a very hard condition to enforce.)

    The question is even more basic, IMO, is it now a public health goal to prevent COVID from spreading? The answer, in the UK at least, is probably a pretty resounding no. We need COVID to spread as widely as possible and get as many people into the natural immunity funnel as possible before the NHS winter crisis.
    Why do you think there will be a crisis in the NHS in the winter?
    The weekly death stats suggest we're starting to catch up on those who dodged the reaper last winter (no flu etc.). I'm not sure if that feeds through into those who end up in hospital, but if it does, then it will probably be a tough winter. (Obviously, people dying isn't as much of a problem for the NHS as people getting ill and taking up beds.)
    Ok, and how does Covid feed into that? How does letting it spread rapidly through the population now help in any way?
    Better to get COVID out of the way now before flu takes off in Dec-Apr.
    You're not quite saying the thing that underpins the logic of this argument: that having Covid burn through the population will add strain on the NHS. That's the logic, isn't it? Spread the strain out over 6 months instead of 4. Have people dying in hospital now instead of in January.
    It's that acknowledgement that having Covid spread wide will kill people, that's what I'm after. Because it's true, isn't it?
    So what if it is? Everyone in the country is going to get it. You're looking for some idiotic gotcha moment but none of us are politicians and you aren't Robert Peston. At least I hope you aren't.
    I'm not after a gotcha, I'm just checking that you're advocating what I think you're advocating.
    There are other things you could advocate to prevent strain on the NHS. I'll just note that masks also help prevent the spread of flu. Some people might like the idea of saving lives lost to both Covid and flu. And perhaps better planning and money for the NHS to cope with what appears to be a predictable time of difficulty. There are different ways forward.
    What's your proposal? That its better to postpone antivaxxer infections from now to the winter crisis?

    I don't agree. I hope as many antivaxxers as possible get the virus now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 38,102
    Scott_xP said:

    UK motorists face queues and closures at petrol stations https://on.ft.com/3AH5kyl

    Based on my observations today, I’d wager that anyone coming through Eurotunnel low on fuel who thought “I’ll fill up when I get back to the UK” has had a fairly stressful day.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 92,713
    edited September 2021

    Sky suggesting Merkel may still be Chancellor for some time to come

    Yes, she'll remain in office while a new coalition is negotiated after the election. Even if the result is clear that will take some time.
    Also, don't forget the SPD hold the Finance Ministry and Justice Ministry posts already anyway.

    If as likely they win most seats tomorrow it will not be like the 1997 Labour landslide and a complete change of government as the SPD are already part of the government, just the CDU/CSU will likely be replaced as their coalition partners by the FDP and Greens.

    The Union have closed the gap though to 1% in the latest poll as Merkel attends an eve of poll rally with Laschet in his hometown of Aachen

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-58689239
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,749
    edited September 2021

    Regarding those unable to be jabbed for medical reasons, FFP3 masks will protect them. No reason for the other 99% of the population to wear a face covering.

    While I would yield to nobody in my disdain for the mask fetish some people seem to have bought into, I would say I don’t think I would ask a pregnant woman to wear an FFP3 mask. I don’t find it terribly easy with full lung capacity.
  • I'm not sure that that article can be described as empty-headed. To a certain extent it simply lays out an unsurprising but important fact, that many of the current issues are related to Brexit, and that the British political and media class have merely become nervous of describing that head-on.

    If Brexit was the sole cause then that would be different, but it is multi faceted with covid, lost driving tests, older drivers retiring, and the terrible work conditions and pay making it very complex

    And let's not forget Europe have a shortage of half a million drivers

    There are some who are trying to make this all about Brexit for their own political motives but it is not
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 38,102

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ” The reason we’re having all these issues is entirely because of Brexit and nothing else.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/24/food-petrol-shortages-brexit-goods-johnson-botched-deal

    Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian? Well, there we are then! QED.
    It must be wonderful to be so open minded.
    Beats being empty-headed!
    Only if you fail to notice the ironic nature of the original observation.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2021
    ydoethur said:

    Regarding those unable to be jabbed for medical reasons, FFP3 masks will protect them. No reason for the other 99% of the population to wear a face covering.

    While I would yield to nobody in my disdain for the mask fetish some people seem to have bought into, I would say I don’t think I would ask a pregnant woman to wear an FFP3 mask. I don’t find it terribly easy with full lung capacity.
    They can shield, or wear an FFP3 mask, or take their chances.

    Same as anyone else.

    EDIT: Oh and they should be vaccinated. The vaccine is available to pregnant women already.
  • Off topic, I am tucking in to the second half of a very tasty pork stir fry we made yesterday. Of course the food purist may object to the use of macaroni in place of noodles and the use of balsamic*, but bugger that - it is yummy.

    So often, the second portion seems to be tastier than the first. Spending a night in the fridge enhances the flavour.

    *Yes, we still have three to choose from.
This discussion has been closed.