Yep anyone either surprised or blaming the students for this cannot remember being 18-21 or was a boring fuck.Jockaline wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 5:46 pmAgree, if I were in the hospitality sector I'd be livid. This was avoidable, it's up there with the care home fiasco.I like neeps wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:34 pmThe blame isn't on the students though. In Oxford this weekend it was "matriculation" which is essentially a pub crawl with gowns on. The university offered a "virtual matriculation" but of course students wanted to go out and about with their new friends and parents wanted to picture their wee dears in robes in Oxford. You could do it virtually in a room on your own but you're missing out and nobody likes to miss out.Slick wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 7:24 am
In two minds about this. It seems to me that there are a lot of people not isolating - I’ve said before that students in particular round here appear to be just going about their normal lives but with masks on - so how do we get compliance? But of course folk won’t use the app if they do this.
Students seem to be a real problem but we seem to be beating about the bush saying this
Who could have predicted students would party, try and squeeze the most of the restricted experience, mingle with anyone and everyone, try to enjoy being 18-21 away from home? Everyone. Who forced them to go to university? The government did to keep the real estate and education bubble afloat and not give universities money as they'd go bust without this farce of incubating and spreading covid in every major university city/town. They're all doing virtual lectures anyway. All this for the monies.
So, coronavirus...
- Paddington Bear
- Posts: 5961
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm
- Location: Hertfordshire
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages, What feats he did that day
Well, yeah, same here. That and the only person who I see banging on about it regularly is known trolling fuckwit.Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 2:17 pmBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 1:50 pm
Masks can make those other slices weaker.
Why is everyone so convinced?
I can only speak for myself, I'm going by the best available advice at this time, from reading articles in publications such as Nature, BMJ, Scientific American, the evidence is stacking up heavily on one side.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
But... (also from scientists, not a politician's assistant)Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:37 amSandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:27 amPublish on Twitter.....Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:04 am
It’s this type of open minded democratic thought that means the latest science on masks cannot currently be published.
Well done
They’re professional scientists......
No journal will publish it.
Researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation recently estimated that if 95 percent of Americans wore masks, it could save up to 100,000 lives from COVID-19 by January 1.
I drink and I forget things.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 2:17 pmBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 1:50 pm
Masks can make those other slices weaker.
Why is everyone so convinced?
I can only speak for myself, I'm going by the best available advice at this time, from reading articles in publications such as Nature, BMJ, Scientific American, the evidence is stacking up heavily on one side.
Reading articles,....
Has the science changed and been done (apart from the Danish one) , because the science as short a time ago (April 2020) said they were of little use, and we were advised as such by scientists and governments.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
Enzedder wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 5:06 pmBut... (also from scientists, not a politician's assistant)Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:37 am
They’re professional scientists......
No journal will publish it.
Researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation recently estimated that if 95 percent of Americans wore masks, it could save up to 100,000 lives from COVID-19 by January 1.
I’d love to read the science and the tests etc.
Why have you ignored all the findings in the articles and links so far?
Don’t bother, I know why.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
I want to know what changed in a couple of months, from being advised very clearly that they didn’t work to them being our saviour.
Also I’m confused we have a second wave post all of us wearing masks.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
From that link on ‘flu
That was before the work done this year
RECOMMENDATION:
Face masks worn by asymptomatic people are conditionally recommended in severe epidemics or pandemics, to reduce transmission in the community. Disposable, surgical masks are recommended to be worn at all times by symptomatic individuals when in contact with other individuals. Although there is no evidence that this is effective in reducing transmission, there is mechanistic plausibility for the potential effectiveness of this measure.
Population: Population with symptomatic individuals; and general public for protection When to apply: At all times for symptomatic individuals (disposable surgical mask), and in
severe epidemics or pandemics for public protection (face masks)
That was before the work done this year
Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:52 pmWas this before or after they said the virus couldn’t transmit between humans ?
I’m going with the chief medical officer in March.
Why March?
Why not take contemporary medical advice from the 1950s?
That would be just as scientific
- fishfoodie
- Posts: 8221
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:25 pm
The bimbot is nothing, if not consistent in his cuntishness.Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:46 pmBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:52 pmWas this before or after they said the virus couldn’t transmit between humans ?
I’m going with the chief medical officer in March.
Why March?
Why not take contemporary medical advice from the 1950s?
That would be just as scientific
He expects knowledge to be like him, & not evolve over time.
Never mind.Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 12:36 pm
what? It’s a science study......
I was just making the point that science isn't a popularity contest.
However, it's somewhat invalid because, although science doesn't care about public opinion, some degree of support from the relevant scientific community is needed for an idea to have traction, so I concede that the metaphor doesn't really work.
I suppose I'm trying to refer to the vast numbers of lay people who consider that access to the internet makes them experts on matters like virology and global warming and the concept that they can counter scientific opinion with weight of numbers.
It was your mention of "democratic thought" as a driver of the science behind the efficacy of masks which implied that the majority opinion should prevail that got me going down this path.
- mat the expat
- Posts: 1456
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:12 pm
Bimbot waiting for a quote ping on his phone
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
Tichtheid wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:46 pmBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:52 pmWas this before or after they said the virus couldn’t transmit between humans ?
I’m going with the chief medical officer in March.
Why March?
Why not take contemporary medical advice from the 1950s?
That would be just as scientific
Well that’s clearly untrue.
If it is will you stop using a mask if the Danes conclude so?
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).
I believe the theory is that Masks don't protect incoming but it to aid reduce the transmission from the mask wearerBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:55 am https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).
No, in Denmark everyone only breathes in. Evolution in action.frodder wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:06 amI believe the theory is that Masks don't protect incoming but it to aid reduce the transmission from the mask wearerBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:55 am https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).
So that must mean Bimbot is Danish..
Always talking out of his arse..
- Insane_Homer
- Posts: 5389
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
- Location: Leafy Surrey
Remember a little over a month ago when was adamant that talk of an impending second wave was bollocks..? Anyone that monumentally wrong can safely be ignored on everything else too.
Last edited by Insane_Homer on Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:55 am https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).
Nope.
You’re ignoring the updates to that five year old study.
Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:41 am
If it is will you stop using a mask if the Danes conclude so?
Whilst I enjoy a bit of internet chatroom ping pong as much as the next guy, in real life I tend to follow the weight of clinical evidence.
If the Danish study shows support for wearing masks, like the many others, will it change your view?
- Muttonbird
- Posts: 377
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:09 am
In March Dumbot refused to believe the UK locking down a week earlier would have saved lives.Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:32 am Remember a little over a month ago when was adamant that talk of an impending second wave was bollocks..? Anyone that monumentally wrong can safely be ignored on everything else too.
He’s been consistently wrong all the way through this but doesn’t have the self awareness to admit it to himself.
He’ll now come back with either a personal attack or something esoteric from six months ago which has a vague grain of truth.
He’ll now come back with either a personal attack or something esoteric from six months ago which has a vague grain of truth.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:32 am Remember a little over a month ago when was adamant that talk of an impending second wave was bollocks..? Anyone that monumentally wrong can safely be ignored on everything else too.
We are a week past 50,000 cases a day.
There’s not a “ second wave” there’s no scale comparison.
I was in fact correct.
Now let’s discuss “false positives” ,
Last edited by Bimbowomxn on Tue Oct 20, 2020 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
frodder wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:06 amI believe the theory is that Masks don't protect incoming but it to aid reduce the transmission from the mask wearerBimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:55 am https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).
The particles move in both directions, only 3% apparently held up.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
Muttonbird wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 8:18 amIn March Dumbot refused to believe the UK locking down a week earlier would have saved lives.Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:32 am Remember a little over a month ago when was adamant that talk of an impending second wave was bollocks..? Anyone that monumentally wrong can safely be ignored on everything else too.
Indeed. It wouldn’t have.
Not sending patients back to care homes on the other hand cost 1,000’s
- Insane_Homer
- Posts: 5389
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
- Location: Leafy Surrey
Has it resorted to arguing with itself now?
“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
Source or onto the proven liars list for you.Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 8:37 am
The particles move in both directions, only 3% apparently held up.
- PlanetGlyndwr
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 3:18 pm
Lions tour is surely off at this point?
Not cancelled yet. i don;t see them cancelling this till a lot closer to teh time - if there's a vaccine (even if only partially effective) and better treatments, together with some sort of rapid testing available, then it will go ahead. If not they'll only cancel 1-2 months before
The average age of a Lions touring fan (fag packet calculation) is probably 60+. Any of you Euros fancy catching Covid and having to be treated in a Johannesburg hospital?Saint wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:50 amNot cancelled yet. i don;t see them cancelling this till a lot closer to teh time - if there's a vaccine (even if only partially effective) and better treatments, together with some sort of rapid testing available, then it will go ahead. If not they'll only cancel 1-2 months before
I suspect your travel insurance will cost as much as the rest of your trip.
On the subject of face masks; a lot of the challenge in quantifying effectiveness is that it's not really known yet, and frankly won't be for a long time, what particle size the mask needs to stop. Most of the work done so far is on measuring the particle size a face mask allows through, and on that basis, a cloth mask is effectively going to be useless to stop COVID19 particles if they were expelled "naked". However, it's also know that that's NOT how they are expelled. They are exhaled/coughed etc in water particles. Cloth masks are at least partially effective at stopping these, particularly in larger sizes. Even if they're only marginally effective, they are worth wearing - IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER MEASURES. They are not a substitute for social distancing, sanitisation etc and should not be thought of that way.
Interestingly, a surgical mask appears to be near 100% effective at stopping COVID at source, whereas it appears to be less effective at stopping influenza. That's really not understand yet, but has been repeatedly proven in experiments
Interestingly, a surgical mask appears to be near 100% effective at stopping COVID at source, whereas it appears to be less effective at stopping influenza. That's really not understand yet, but has been repeatedly proven in experiments
Another person to have Covid twice
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/54612253
Positive in Feb and positive now.
Bit worrying.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/54612253
Positive in Feb and positive now.
Bit worrying.
Your such a beacon of happiness and positivity.Sandstorm wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:54 amThe average age of a Lions touring fan (fag packet calculation) is probably 60+. Any of you Euros fancy catching Covid and having to be treated in a Johannesburg hospital?Saint wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:50 amNot cancelled yet. i don;t see them cancelling this till a lot closer to teh time - if there's a vaccine (even if only partially effective) and better treatments, together with some sort of rapid testing available, then it will go ahead. If not they'll only cancel 1-2 months before
I suspect your travel insurance will cost as much as the rest of your trip.
-
- Posts: 1731
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:49 pm
Glaston wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 11:17 am Another person to have Covid twice
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/54612253
Positive in Feb and positive now.
Bit worrying.
completely asymptomatic".