Re: So, coronavirus...
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:33 pm
Pfft. Surgeons. What do they know?BnM wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:32 pm A'forking'men
I can't believe how many stupid people we have in this country.
Pfft. Surgeons. What do they know?BnM wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:32 pm A'forking'men
I can't believe how many stupid people we have in this country.
Clogs needs a new pair of track pants.
Biffer wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:38 am Herd immunity is not the reason for the drop in cases in Europe
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals ... 1357-X.pdf
I infer that "compensatory measures" really translates to convincing people that they need to accept a larger number of infections/deaths, if they don't want the economy trashed for years to come.Although the impacts of current control interventions on transmission need to be balanced against their short-term and long-term economic and health impacts on society, epi-demiological data suggest that no country has yet seen infection rates sufficient to prevent a second wave of transmission, should controls or behavioural precautions be relaxed without compensatory measures in place.
If your next election is more than 2 years ahead, he'll be fine.Ellafan wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:18 amBiffer wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:38 am Herd immunity is not the reason for the drop in cases in Europe
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals ... 1357-X.pdfI infer that "compensatory measures" really translates to convincing people that they need to accept a larger number of infections/deaths, if they don't want the economy trashed for years to come.Although the impacts of current control interventions on transmission need to be balanced against their short-term and long-term economic and health impacts on society, epi-demiological data suggest that no country has yet seen infection rates sufficient to prevent a second wave of transmission, should controls or behavioural precautions be relaxed without compensatory measures in place.
Good luck finding a politician (in a democracy) who'll say that.
Congrats mateInsane_Homer wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 9:17 am Just received my test result back via text, Negative for COVID.
Quicker than expected![]()
Back to the office tomorrow, this working from home malarky is kak.
Could be available in the UK in SeptemberOxford scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in their quest for a Covid-19 vaccine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... pens-next/
There as been enough leaks out if this trial tgat to be honest that was being taken as read. It's the phase III trials that are keyLongshanks wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:40 pm Positive news on a vaccine......
Could be available in the UK in SeptemberOxford scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in their quest for a Covid-19 vaccine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... pens-next/
Fingers crossedLongshanks wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:40 pm Positive news on a vaccine......
Could be available in the UK in SeptemberOxford scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in their quest for a Covid-19 vaccine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... pens-next/
Just leave it to Boris (dropped trifle) to sort out....Longshanks wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:40 pm Positive news on a vaccine......
Could be available in the UK in SeptemberOxford scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in their quest for a Covid-19 vaccine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... pens-next/
paywallLongshanks wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:40 pm Positive news on a vaccine......
Could be available in the UK in SeptemberOxford scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in their quest for a Covid-19 vaccine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... pens-next/
Ellafan wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:31 ampaywallLongshanks wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:40 pm Positive news on a vaccine......
Could be available in the UK in SeptemberOxford scientists believe they have made a breakthrough in their quest for a Covid-19 vaccine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... pens-next/
What stage are the trials at?
There is at least one in human trials in Australia, but it's 12 months from release (if it works).
Because you're covering the area where you spread from not the area that can be spread to.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 am So, why are we wearing face masks instead of visors covering the WHOLE face. One would have thought that this would be a no-brainer.
CM11 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:47 amBecause you're covering the area where you spread from not the area that can be spread to.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 am So, why are we wearing face masks instead of visors covering the WHOLE face. One would have thought that this would be a no-brainer.
Nobody is stopping you from wearing a visorAmethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 am So, why are we wearing face masks instead of visors covering the WHOLE face. One would have thought that this would be a no-brainer.
Which I do, but wearing a visor instead of wearing a face mask should be promoted don't you think? Makes sense to me.
The point of wearing a mask is to stop the wearer spreading the virus. A mask does that better than a visor.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:56 amWhich I do, but wearing a visor instead of wearing a face mask should be promoted don't you think? Makes sense to me.
Got any evidence for that?Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:08 amYou imagine wrongly. I think I'm going to write a thesis on how many infections could have been avoided if everyone wore visors instead of face masks after Miss Corona has left the building.Raggs wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:59 am Can't imagine a visor stops many droplets from escaping out the bottom or around the sides. A mask stops a huge amount of them.
That's debatable (and probably only true in extreme cases of sever coughing or sneezing). Besides, some face cloths are so shit that it's useless. However, what can not be denied is that the infection should be less if ALL are wearing full face visors.Biffer wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:01 amThe point of wearing a mask is to stop the wearer spreading the virus. A mask does that better than a visor.
Yes, infection would be less if all wore full face visors.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:15 amThat's debatable (and probably only true in extreme cases of sever coughing or sneezing). Besides, some face cloths are so shit that it's useless. However, what can not be denied is that the infection should be less if ALL are wearing full face visors.Biffer wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:01 amThe point of wearing a mask is to stop the wearer spreading the virus. A mask does that better than a visor.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:56 am
Which I do, but wearing a visor instead of wearing a face mask should be promoted don't you think? Makes sense to me.
...Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:26 am Also, you are assuming that droplets could easily escape a visor. I'm talking about a PROPER visor. The kind that the doctors and nurses wear who are caring for the critical cases in ICU. By now millions of cheap models could have been rolled out to the general public.
Well if you want to get kitted up like me at an arrest with a proper fitted mask, visor, suit and gloves you can crack on. Thats the real way to stop the spread but I'll be fucked if I'm going out to buy that and wear it every time I'm out.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:56 amWhich I do, but wearing a visor instead of wearing a face mask should be promoted don't you think? Makes sense to me.
Insane_Homer wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 9:17 am Just received my test result back via text, Negative for COVID.
Quicker than expected![]()
Back to the office tomorrow, this working from home malarky is kak.
It's not necessary to "decontaminate" a face mask too? Easier and faster to "decontaminate" a visor.Jock42 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:38 amWell if you want to get kitted up like me at an arrest with a proper fitted mask, visor, suit and gloves you can crack on. Thats the real way to stop the spread but I'll be fucked if I'm going out to buy that and wear it every time I'm out.
You'll also need acticlor (or similar) to decon your visor or lots of visors.
Thats not practical.
Unless you wear them tipped back on your head like the barber I went to the other dayAmethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 am So, why are we wearing face masks instead of visors covering the WHOLE face. One would have thought that this would be a no-brainer.
One time use.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:46 amIt's not necessary to "decontaminate" a face mask too? Easier and faster to "decontaminate" a visor.Jock42 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:38 amWell if you want to get kitted up like me at an arrest with a proper fitted mask, visor, suit and gloves you can crack on. Thats the real way to stop the spread but I'll be fucked if I'm going out to buy that and wear it every time I'm out.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:56 am
Which I do, but wearing a visor instead of wearing a face mask should be promoted don't you think? Makes sense to me.
You'll also need acticlor (or similar) to decon your visor or lots of visors.
Thats not practical.
If you cover your whole face with a pillow, I think we'd all appreciate it.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 am So, why are we wearing face masks instead of visors covering the WHOLE face.
Jock42 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:56 amOne time use.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:46 amIt's not necessary to "decontaminate" a face mask too? Easier and faster to "decontaminate" a visor.Jock42 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:38 am
Well if you want to get kitted up like me at an arrest with a proper fitted mask, visor, suit and gloves you can crack on. Thats the real way to stop the spread but I'll be fucked if I'm going out to buy that and wear it every time I'm out.
You'll also need acticlor (or similar) to decon your visor or lots of visors.
Thats not practical.
One time use can't be afforded by most. Wearing a cheap, proper visor = effective way of reducing spread of virus and cost-effective; wearing face mask/cloth = preparing for a beauty contest hoping you don't get infected/ could be expensive and out of reach for many. No-brainer. Use a proper, cheap visorJock42 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:56 amOne time use.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:46 amIt's not necessary to "decontaminate" a face mask too? Easier and faster to "decontaminate" a visor.Jock42 wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 8:38 am
Well if you want to get kitted up like me at an arrest with a proper fitted mask, visor, suit and gloves you can crack on. Thats the real way to stop the spread but I'll be fucked if I'm going out to buy that and wear it every time I'm out.
You'll also need acticlor (or similar) to decon your visor or lots of visors.
Thats not practical.
You asked why it wasn't necessary to decontaminate a mask. If you're washing a reusable mask properly you're effectively decontaminating it, this doesn't negate decontaminating a visor.Amethyst wrote: Thu Jul 16, 2020 9:05 amOne time use can't be afforded by most. Wearing a cheap, proper visor = effective way of reducing spread of virus and cost-effective; wearing face mask/cloth = preparing for a beauty contest hoping you don't get infected/ could be expensive and out of reach for many. No-brainer. Use a proper, cheap visor