Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Masks or no Masks ?


Masks or no masks  

57 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we keep wearing masks ?

    • Yes
      35
    • No
      22

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 10/23/2020 at 08:23 AM

Recommended Posts

Just England on lockdown.

I loved the staggering arrogance of the BBC news anchors this morning, asking the Welsh CMO “England has gone into lockdown as you exit yours, does that make any sense?!”

CMO “Er... well we went into a shorter lockdown weeks ago to avoid all this. We had the same data as you but acted earlier”.

Meanwhile the BBC have their little banner at the bottom of the screen “Scotland: Don’t travel to England”.

And people wonder why the independence vote continues to rise.... *sigh*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 219
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Yeah it’s definitely house arrest isn’t it?  I mean you’re only allowed out for work, school, shopping, exercise and medical appointments ie 90% of all the reasons you’d normally leave the house.  It’s a no socialising rule not a house arrest.

Youre just becoming annoying now.  

That is why it should not be labelled 'Lockdown'

When it isn't.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That is why it should not be labelled 'Lockdown'

When it isn't.;)

Quite - the Wuhan lockdown really was a lockdown and really was quite similar to house arrest.

What we have is closer to a teenager being grounded and told not to see his mates until 2 December (but still having to go to school)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There are numerous studies and research papers that say masks ARE effective in reducing the spread of the virus.

I just read through a recent Independent article that references half a dozen papers including this one...

https://www.ed.ac.uk/covid-19-response/expert-insights/why-wearing-face-covering-can-make-difference

Of all the covid related inconveniences and restrictions currently placed on our lives, popping a face mask on is one that doesn’t trouble me.

The link you provided doesn't provide substantive evidence just platitudes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

platitude
 
  1. a remark or statement, especially one with a moral content, that has been used too often to be interesting or thoughtful.
    "he masks his disdain for her with platitudes about how she should believe in herself more"
     
    substantive evidence for mask wearing provided 100% proof
     
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

How about a large scale randomised controlled trial? With 6000 participants, half wearing masks half not. 

Its completed but the authors haven't published yet as the results aren't politically correct!

 

 

 Where did you get the "Its completed but the authors haven't published yet as the results aren't politically correct!   

Maybe there are methodolgical or subject compliance problems?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32829745/

 Two issues are that subjects are requred to daily self test nasal swabs and undertake to wear a mask in public 3 hours day plus for a month.  Any deviation from these strict rules would invalidate the trial, also not really supervised laboratory conditions.

You don't believe in PCR test accuracy fundamental to this anyway, remember.

April 2 to june 2 had an infection rate of 247 and 30 confirmed cases in Denmark, out of  around 28000  to  88000 approx tests, for 5.8 million population.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/denmark?country=~DNK

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1106073/weekly-number-of-coronavirus-tests-in-denmark/

 Seems flawed as they are testing1/1000 of the populaton, or something with as little prevalence as little as 1/20,000 of the population at the end of the study.  Maybe this is why 'they are not brave enough to publish it'?

 There is also the issue of clusters, in the summer 'hotspots' were I /5000, studying 3000 subjects is meaningless.

 

In the late summer, health authorities stated that ‘special focus’ would be placed on municipalities in which infections exceeded a rate of 20 cases per 100,000 residents.

  https://www.thelocal.dk/20201028/maps-where-are-denmarks-coronavirus-hotspots

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Danmask study, maybe early in the year they were expecting infection rates tenfold or a hundred fod more than actually occoured, also it was sponsored by a supermarket chain so maybe they have trousered the cash already and have no need to publish. There are many places online it can be published if they wanted to release it.

This link has been posted here several times, and all over the net.  Testing 1 /1000 of the population with such low prevalence is the problem here,  surely anyone would pick up on that even with a cursory look.   

 Perhaps the real study was to see how far this test would be shared online among non maskers, but with a really obvious flaw inherent that any layman could easily spot, and then see whether anyone would even bother to read the small print?    clever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 Where did you get the "Its completed but the authors haven't published yet as the results aren't politically correct!   

Maybe there are methodolgical or subject compliance problems?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32829745/

 Two issues are that subjects are requred to daily self test nasal swabs and undertake to wear a mask in public 3 hours day plus for a month.  Any deviation from these strict rules would invalidate the trial, also not really supervised laboratory conditions.

You don't believe in PCR test accuracy fundamental to this anyway, remember.

April 2 to june 2 had an infection rate of 247 and 30 confirmed cases in Denmark, out of  around 28000  to  88000 approx tests, for 5.8 million population.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/denmark?country=~DNK

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1106073/weekly-number-of-coronavirus-tests-in-denmark/

 Seems flawed as they are testing1/1000 of the populaton, or something with as little prevalence as little as 1/20,000 of the population at the end of the study.  Maybe this is why 'they are not brave enough to publish it'?

 There is also the issue of clusters, in the summer 'hotspots' were I /5000, studying 3000 subjects is meaningless.

 

In the late summer, health authorities stated that ‘special focus’ would be placed on municipalities in which infections exceeded a rate of 20 cases per 100,000 residents.

  https://www.thelocal.dk/20201028/maps-where-are-denmarks-coronavirus-hotspots

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 Yawn, yawn  yawn    about the 4th time you have posted this link, is this some communist posting quota system going on here? you have the means of production comrade ;)

...and the simple answer to debunk my cursory layman's critique of your Danmask study?

 Was the sample size of 1/2000  of a population of 6 million, with an incidence of maybe 1/5000 ih 'hotspots' too large?   🤣

 

n.b.   Realtime data not quite so simple I know, but I call BS on this 'smoking gun' secret survey.  Even if they had 2 mask  and 0 non mask infections, the super low sample size is too uncertain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

The screen grab of the alleged email has been altered. I call BS. 

There are plenty of journals that can publish research, when the guy says they will publish when they are brave enough this just means the research is a load of tosh and no one is going to publish it.  Clearly we all need to try harder to get ontop of the spread of this virus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 Yawn, yawn  yawn    about the 4th time you have posted this link, is this some communist posting quota system going on here? you have the means of production comrade ;)

...and the simple answer to debunk my cursory layman's critique of your Danmask study?

 Was the sample size of 1/2000  of a population of 6 million, with an incidence of maybe 1/5000 ih 'hotspots' too large?   🤣

 

n.b.   Realtime data not quite so simple I know, but I call BS on this 'smoking gun' secret survey.  Even if they had 2 mask  and 0 non mask infections, the super low sample size is too uncertain.

 

 

The screen grab of the alleged email has been altered. I call BS. 

 

 

 

There are plenty of journals that can publish research, when the guy says they will publish when they are brave enough this just means the research is a load of tosh and no one is going to publish it.  Clearly we all need to try harder to get ontop of the spread of this virus.

Keep on spouting the bile and ignoring the evidence. There is an article here from New Scientist about how scientists are being cold shoulder and trolled. One of the examples is the Danmask study. 

https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2020/10/why-scientists-fear-toxic-covid-19-debate

At present, scientists are struggling to publish a randomised control study in Denmark that examined the population effects of wearing masks. While there is some evidence that masks could work, this is mostly based on laboratory or observational studies. Thomas Benfield, a clinical researcher at the University of Copenhagen and one of the lead investigators on the mask study, has refused to share the results, but has said that it will be published “as soon as a journal is brave enough”. This has led many to conclude that the results demonstrate a lack of evidence for mask wearing and that is why the team is encountering difficulty in getting the study published.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Keep on spouting the bile and ignoring the evidence. There is an article here from New Scientist about how scientists are being cold shoulder and trolled. One of the examples is the Danmask study. 

https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2020/10/why-scientists-fear-toxic-covid-19-debate

At present, scientists are struggling to publish a randomised control study in Denmark that examined the population effects of wearing masks. While there is some evidence that masks could work, this is mostly based on laboratory or observational studies. Thomas Benfield, a clinical researcher at the University of Copenhagen and one of the lead investigators on the mask study, has refused to share the results, but has said that it will be published “as soon as a journal is brave enough”. This has led many to conclude that the results demonstrate a lack of evidence for mask wearing and that is why the team is encountering difficulty in getting the study published.

You are quoting New Scientist, this is not even The Sun when it comes to science

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 This is behind a paywall, I can't read it.  Give me a relevant new scientist link and you have my attention.

 Better still, refute my layamn's cursory examination - you did read it right? before posing it here several times? Ask your mrs perhaps?   

 This sample size / incidence / population ratio seems ridiculous. The abstract is valid, just between the original idea and the much lower than predicted (contained?) incidence made it study irrelevant I suggest. 

Why the secrecy? results could be posted anywhere -even here, surely?

6 million punters,   6000 tested ... someone tell me I'm talking shite   please  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Keep on spouting the bile and ignoring the evidence. There is an article here from New Scientist about how scientists are being cold shoulder and trolled. One of the examples is the Danmask study. 

https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/coronavirus/2020/10/why-scientists-fear-toxic-covid-19-debate

At present, scientists are struggling to publish a randomised control study in Denmark that examined the population effects of wearing masks. While there is some evidence that masks could work, this is mostly based on laboratory or observational studies. Thomas Benfield, a clinical researcher at the University of Copenhagen and one of the lead investigators on the mask study, has refused to share the results, but has said that it will be published “as soon as a journal is brave enough”. This has led many to conclude that the results demonstrate a lack of evidence for mask wearing and that is why the team is encountering difficulty in getting the study published.

Why do you care so much? We all made our opinions know within the first few posts of this thread. I quietly think anti-maskers are selfish... you think we are I’ll-informed. sheep. I’m cool with that. 

I think there should be far more vitriol regarding decisions such as incentivising eating out or reopening pubs as they did. These terrible decisions have had hugely detrimental impacts on the spread of the virus. 
 

It’s no surprise to me that the 4 people I know who have tested positive for covid are ALL in their early 20s with track and trace telling them they caught it in pubs!!! Brilliant!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got a video from my mates in London... Borough Market on Saturday afternoon (ram packed), so it's not just Sweden

Why are they allowed to get away with it and you are not? THINK ABOUT IT

I wish the best for you and your loved ones and I honestly apologize for being rude

God bless and happy holidays to you all!

PS German isn't a race, it's my family x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.