PT today

[tim...]

So this week is the start of the pre-9 am embargo on my card, and face
masks.

I usually do my weekly shopping on Tuesday, I left home at 8:55 so as not to
be twirley.

Got to the stop at 8:58 just as a bus was arriving, but as it was going one
stop short of my destination I let it go. But I needn't have bothered
because it was one that had yet to be converted to accepting payment and I
would have got a "free" ride.

Nevertheless, I waited 3 minutes for the next bus number, and touched my
card to "pay"

There are signs at the entrance telling you that masks are required

Some people were wearing masks at the stop, some not, but everyone was
wearing them on the bus.

Boy, does wearing a mask steam up your glasses. I had to take mine off -
glasses that is.

FWIW, none of the shops that were open in the high street had queues at this
time

Come lunchtime I had to make my trip to the Hospital.

As I haven't got out much recently, I decided to walk to the main line
station. This is the first time that I have been there to catch a train
since lockdown.

The side entrance that I would normally used is no longer - it is exit only.

So I had to walk round to the main entrance where there are barriers up to
organise a queuing system. No idea whether there is ever enough people such
that this is needed.

Again some passengers on the platform had their masks on, some not. As per
the above, I had to keep mine off otherwise I couldn't read the next train
indicators.

Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.

Everybody was masked up

In neither direction did I see "helpers" telling people to wear masks or
anybody giving them out to pax who had forgotten them

The hospital appt was a bust, they had cancelled it without telling me.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

tim

[Recliner]

Post by tim...
So this week is the start of the pre-9 am embargo on my card, and face
masks.
I usually do my weekly shopping on Tuesday, I left home at 8:55 so as not to
be twirley.
Got to the stop at 8:58 just as a bus was arriving, but as it was going one
stop short of my destination I let it go. But I needn't have bothered
because it was one that had yet to be converted to accepting payment and I
would have got a "free" ride.
Nevertheless, I waited 3 minutes for the next bus number, and touched my
card to "pay"
There are signs at the entrance telling you that masks are required
Some people were wearing masks at the stop, some not, but everyone was
wearing them on the bus.
Boy, does wearing a mask steam up your glasses. I had to take mine off -
glasses that is.

I trust you've invested in some suitably stylish examples, such as these, a
snip at under £105 each:
<https://www.etsy.com/listing/794633459/hermes-facemasks>

Post by tim...
FWIW, none of the shops that were open in the high street had queues at this
time
Come lunchtime I had to make my trip to the Hospital.
As I haven't got out much recently, I decided to walk to the main line
station. This is the first time that I have been there to catch a train
since lockdown.
The side entrance that I would normally used is no longer - it is exit only.
So I had to walk round to the main entrance where there are barriers up to
organise a queuing system. No idea whether there is ever enough people such
that this is needed.
Again some passengers on the platform had their masks on, some not. As per
the above, I had to keep mine off otherwise I couldn't read the next train
indicators.
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.
Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

Post by tim...
In neither direction did I see "helpers" telling people to wear masks or
anybody giving them out to pax who had forgotten them

I think that's only at major stations. They also give out free masks for
those that need them, but probably only for the first couple of days.

Post by tim...
The hospital appt was a bust, they had cancelled it without telling me.
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Ah, bad luck!

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:18:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.
Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

I don't know about the trains but in the buses they are most certainly not.
I saw a number going past today with half the passengers unmasked. And good
for them. I won't be wearing one either next time I use PT.

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:18:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.
Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

I don't know about the trains but in the buses they are most certainly not.
I saw a number going past today with half the passengers unmasked. And good
for them. I won't be wearing one either next time I use PT.

Nor will I, fortunately they haven't introduced that ridiculous practice
up here, at least not yet. My condition (mild autism) means that I
cannot relate easily to people in a face-to-face situation unless I can
*see* their faces.

Not only that, they are worse than useless unless used *properly* which
rules out pretty much everybody except medical professionals.

Time was if someone had a mask on and they walked into a shop, they'd be
trying to rob the place..! In my motorcycling days I was regularly told
to remove my helmet when paying for petrol etc.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 18:20:21 +0100

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:18:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.
Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

I don't know about the trains but in the buses they are most certainly not.
I saw a number going past today with half the passengers unmasked. And good
for them. I won't be wearing one either next time I use PT.

Nor will I, fortunately they haven't introduced that ridiculous practice
up here, at least not yet. My condition (mild autism) means that I

Give Nicola her usual 2 week delay and she'll implement exactly the same rules
as Westminster including this no doubt.

Post by MissRiaElaine
cannot relate easily to people in a face-to-face situation unless I can
*see* their faces.
Not only that, they are worse than useless unless used *properly* which
rules out pretty much everybody except medical professionals.
Time was if someone had a mask on and they walked into a shop, they'd be
trying to rob the place..! In my motorcycling days I was regularly told
to remove my helmet when paying for petrol etc.

Yes, that is certainly a factor that the No10 muppets have overlooked - once a
lot of people are back out on the streets its going to be a criminals paradise.
Muggers and shoplifters in particular will have a field day.

[tim...]

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
So this week is the start of the pre-9 am embargo on my card, and face
masks.
I usually do my weekly shopping on Tuesday, I left home at 8:55 so as not to
be twirley.
Got to the stop at 8:58 just as a bus was arriving, but as it was going one
stop short of my destination I let it go. But I needn't have bothered
because it was one that had yet to be converted to accepting payment and I
would have got a "free" ride.
Nevertheless, I waited 3 minutes for the next bus number, and touched my
card to "pay"
There are signs at the entrance telling you that masks are required
Some people were wearing masks at the stop, some not, but everyone was
wearing them on the bus.
Boy, does wearing a mask steam up your glasses. I had to take mine off -
glasses that is.

I trust you've invested in some suitably stylish examples, such as these, a
<https://www.etsy.com/listing/794633459/hermes-facemasks>

good god

I was expecting something functionally superior

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
FWIW, none of the shops that were open in the high street had queues at this
time
Come lunchtime I had to make my trip to the Hospital.
As I haven't got out much recently, I decided to walk to the main line
station. This is the first time that I have been there to catch a train
since lockdown.
The side entrance that I would normally used is no longer - it is exit only.
So I had to walk round to the main entrance where there are barriers up to
organise a queuing system. No idea whether there is ever enough people such
that this is needed.
Again some passengers on the platform had their masks on, some not. As per
the above, I had to keep mine off otherwise I couldn't read the next train
indicators.
Train was about 10% full, none of the seats were marked out of use. Pax
were left to make their own mind up as to where they should sit.
Everybody was masked up

Yes, that confirms other accounts: people are complying, without any
heavy-handed rule enforcement.

Post by tim...
In neither direction did I see "helpers" telling people to wear masks or
anybody giving them out to pax who had forgotten them

I think that's only at major stations.

both stations in the 20 busiest in London list

both interchange with underground

I could have done the journey by Underground, NR + bus was quicker

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

In what sense?

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.

Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.

Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.
Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.

Of course it will. The purpose is simply to significantly reduce the
distance that droplets from an infected person are projected. It's not
intended to filter them all out. And they aren't claimed to protect the
wearer.

Post by MissRiaElaine
Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

The hands of an infected person are almost certainly contaminated anyway,
so the masks won't make things worse.

[tim...]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.
Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use the
correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't going
to be any use.

but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else

not the other way round

HTH

tim

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

[Recliner]

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?

And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?

[Marland]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?
And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?

Impatience, especially with the growing number of people who reckon they
have mental issues of some kind and expect society to work around their
foibles , mental health problems seem to be spreading among the population
quicker than Covid 19 and its become fashionable .
It detracts from the genuine cases who have real issues .

And I’ll, have a Gin and Tonic please.

GH

[Recliner]

Post by Marland

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?
And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?

Impatience, especially with the growing number of people who reckon they
have mental issues of some kind and expect society to work around their
foibles , mental health problems seem to be spreading among the population
quicker than Covid 19 and its become fashionable .
It detracts from the genuine cases who have real issues .
And I’ll, have a Gin and Tonic please.

That's very relevant. During the lockdown, I've discovered the delights of
Fentiman's tonics — they make Fevertree look pedestrian. And Orange
Marmalade Welsh gin!

[Marland]

Post by Recliner

Post by Marland

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?
And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?

Impatience, especially with the growing number of people who reckon they
have mental issues of some kind and expect society to work around their
foibles , mental health problems seem to be spreading among the population
quicker than Covid 19 and its become fashionable .
It detracts from the genuine cases who have real issues .
And I’ll, have a Gin and Tonic please.

That's very relevant. During the lockdown, I've discovered the delights of
Fentiman's tonics — they make Fevertree look pedestrian. And Orange
Marmalade Welsh gin!

I have had some of their products on occasions , ISTR they do quite a good
Ginger Beer.
Their main market seemed to be in the sort of tea room or “farm shop” that
accompanies a stately home or gardens where premium products can command
the higher prices asked , and Waitrose.
Fevertree were fortunate to be the new kid on the block with a good product
just as Gin in various flavours became the fashionable drink, and
persuading people that you need different flavoured Tonics
for different styles of Gin was a good move and the older company has
probably benefited from that.

GH

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Marland

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?
And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?

Impatience, especially with the growing number of people who reckon they
have mental issues of some kind and expect society to work around their
foibles , mental health problems seem to be spreading among the population
quicker than Covid 19 and its become fashionable .
It detracts from the genuine cases who have real issues .
And I’ll, have a Gin and Tonic please.

That's very relevant. During the lockdown, I've discovered the delights of
Fentiman's tonics — they make Fevertree look pedestrian. And Orange
Marmalade Welsh gin!

IIRC Fentiman's also do a very nice ginger beer.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Marland

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured,
or protected or whatever.

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

How often do you need to speak to a deaf person?

Irrelevant. And *how dare you* insult a large proportion of the
population..? For all you know, one or more of my family could be deaf,
or my friends. Yes, I do have some, what about you..?
And you haven't answered my question about those of us who cannot relate
to people when we cannot see their faces. It frightens me and I am not
alone. There are many people out there with similar mental health
conditions. Mine is autism, what's yours..?

Impatience, especially with the growing number of people who reckon they
have mental issues of some kind and expect society to work around their
foibles , mental health problems seem to be spreading among the population
quicker than Covid 19 and its become fashionable .
It detracts from the genuine cases who have real issues .
And I’ll, have a Gin and Tonic please.

That's very relevant. During the lockdown, I've discovered the delights of
Fentiman's tonics — they make Fevertree look pedestrian. And Orange
Marmalade Welsh gin!

IIRC Fentiman's also do a very nice ginger beer.

I think that was their original product from 1905. The company did go
dormant in the mid '60s, but was resurrected in 1988 by founder Thomas
Fentiman's great grandson.

[tim...]

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:19:13 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.

How do you know? And do you mean the wearers, or others in their
vicinity?

Because that's what placebos do. They make people think they're cured, or
protected or whatever.

Oh, I agree that there are people who will think that wearing a basic mask
protects them

despite being told more than once that it doesn't

how's the staying go:

"you can't fix stupid!"

HTH

tim

[Roland Perry]

Post by MissRiaElaine
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

On public transport at the moment, not at all. Who would they be
lip-reading, anyway?

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Roland Perry

I cannot deal with people face to  face unless I can *see* their face.
And how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

On public transport at the moment, not at all. Who would they be
lip-reading, anyway?

The person they're speaking to..? Don't you talk to people..?

[tim...]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
but they are meant to stop you contaminating someone else
not the other way round

So how are they going to do that, when you are infected and touch your
mask then touch something else..?

An infected person's hands would be contaminated anyway, so they certainly
don't make things worse. But they do greatly reduce the distance that
droplets are projected, which is all they're meant to do.

Possibly. But they still lull people into a false sense of security.
I cannot deal with people face to face unless I can *see* their face. And
how is a deaf person supposed to lip-read..?

but you are not speaking to me when I am sitting on the bus, in the seat
behind you

[Roland Perry]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.
Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.
Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

You are addressing the wrong function. Masks for travellers aren't PPE,
they are to stop coughs and sneezes *BY THE WEARER*, spreading the
disease. Also by the wearer not so easily touching their mouth/nose and
then wiping their snot on the surroundings.

This is, incidentally, why a DIY dust mask with a valve in it is "the
wrong way round". But they are still better than nothing.

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine
Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

 In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.
Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.
Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

You are addressing the wrong function. Masks for travellers aren't PPE,
they are to stop coughs and sneezes *BY THE WEARER*, spreading the
disease. Also by the wearer not so easily touching their mouth/nose and
then wiping their snot on the surroundings.
This is, incidentally, why a DIY dust mask with a valve in it is "the
wrong way round". But they are still better than nothing.

Oh believe what you like, I give up.

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine
Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

 In what sense?

In the sense that people have them on for.
Unless you are a medical professional or you have the training to use
the correct mask in the correct way (including disposal) then it isn't
going to be any use.
Once you touch them, then they are contaminated, and so are your hands
and anything you touch.

You are addressing the wrong function. Masks for travellers aren't PPE,
they are to stop coughs and sneezes *BY THE WEARER*, spreading the
disease. Also by the wearer not so easily touching their mouth/nose and
then wiping their snot on the surroundings.
This is, incidentally, why a DIY dust mask with a valve in it is "the
wrong way round". But they are still better than nothing.

Oh believe what you like, I give up.

So what do you believe?

As far as I can tell, you don't want to wear a mask because they're hot and
uncomfortable. I agree.

But I don't then dream up increasingly bizarre 'dog-ate-my-homework'
reasons for not doing so. Have I missed any of yours:

- Only trained medical staff with PPE training are capable of wearing
masks.

- They don't protect the wearer. No, they're not claimed to do so.

- It will prevent autistic people forming deep and personal relationships
with people they casually encounter on public transport. These are the same
people who don't relate to other people, anyway, with or without masks,
right?

- They give wearers a false sense of security.

- They will contaminate the hands of infected wearers. Really?

- They will make everyone look like street robbers.

- They will prevent deaf people from lip reading essential announcements
on public transport.

[tim...]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public at
large are remotely functional.

You're wrong

some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem

Whether they actually work, or not

I have no idea

[Roland Perry]

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

If you mean the DIY dust-masks with a knob on the front, that's a valve
not a filter. They do reduce condensation, and prevent the wearer
touching their mouth and nose.

Inward filtering (their original purpose) is to FFP2, and people will
argue until the cows come home whether that stops infected droplets
only, or also the semi-mythical naked viruses themselves.

Outbound they'll stop the worst of a sneeze or cough.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve
the condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

If you mean the DIY dust-masks with a knob on the front, that's a valve
not a filter. They do reduce condensation, and prevent the wearer
touching their mouth and nose.
Inward filtering (their original purpose) is to FFP2, and people will
argue until the cows come home whether that stops infected droplets
only, or also the semi-mythical naked viruses themselves.
Outbound they'll stop the worst of a sneeze or cough.

I note that the one I have, in addition to the metal strip over the
bridge of the nose, has a matching foam strip inside. That seems to seal
it off sufficiently that very little moisture ends up on glasses fitted
over the top.

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

[Recliner]

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 15:16:27 +0100

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

I saw some paranoid with a mask take it off to cough yesterday. You have to
laugh :)

[Recliner]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 15:16:27 +0100

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

I saw some paranoid with a mask take it off to cough yesterday. You have to
laugh :)

Yup, that's pretty dumb.

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:20:21 +0100, MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve the
condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at least
two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

False sense of security against what?

Against thinking they're protected when they're not. And that's what the
majority of idiots out there think. And if you can't see that, then
you're one of them. I give up.

How do you know what the majority of the public think?

[Roland Perry]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

 On what basis did you reach that conclusion?  As long as they're at
least  two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

I am perfectly capable of acting like a grown-up by making my own
decisions and not wearing something I know to be useless. If you think
they work then wear one, but don't come anywhere near me with it on.

[Recliner]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

 On what basis did you reach that conclusion?  As long as they're at
least  two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

I am perfectly capable of acting like a grown-up by making my own
decisions and not wearing something I know to be useless. If you think
they work then wear one, but don't come anywhere near me with it on.

Why would you be afraid if a mask wearer came anywhere near you?

[Roland Perry]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

 On what basis did you reach that conclusion?  As long as they're
at least  two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent
at that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public
to "act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the
perceived risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

I am perfectly capable of acting like a grown-up by making my own
decisions and not wearing something I know to be useless.

In a nutshell, you just contradicted yourself in one sentence.

Post by MissRiaElaine
If you think they work then wear one,

Actually, I'm more likely to wear the sort of mask the Minister said we
shouldn't - one of those rectangular blue surgical masks. Like the less
comfortable FFP2 dust mask, I have long[1] had a few in my DIY drawer
(for use when sanding lead paint, or cutting chipboard).

Post by MissRiaElaine
but don't come anywhere near me with it on.

If I encounter you on public transport I'd expect almost everyone to be
wearing some sort of face covering. Playing whack-a-mole with me isn't
going to help much.

[1] Some, so long that elastic has perished <sigh>

[Marland]

Post by Roland Perry
,
Actually, I'm more likely to wear the sort of mask the Minister said we
shouldn't - one of those rectangular blue surgical masks. Like the less
comfortable FFP2 dust mask, I have long[1] had a few in my DIY drawer
(for use when sanding lead paint, or cutting chipboard).

One of my activities frequently involves needle gunning steelwork which
throws up a fair amount of fine oxide particles and which makes any mucous
issue look like it did following a trip London 4 decades ago before
emissions were reduced.
By a stroke of luck when on of the facilities involved in the missis care
work was closed down a year ago the building contents was being emptied
mainly into a skip which one naturally delves through and I found about
50 boxes of those types of mask with each box holding 50 of them so I took
them for the task mentioned. Still have about 45 boxes left. Did think
about offering them to some people who were desperate for them but given
their provenance of being acquired from a skip and a period in a garden
shed where there is a small possibility that rodents may have been in
contact with the boxes decided a receiver would say “thanks “and then bin
them . So I’ve kept them and now have a good supply for the foreseeable
future, if just used for travel and shopping a decade at least.

The packs of disposable latex gloves also acquired we have gone through
quicker as they can be worn while painting or keeping hands clean while
gardening etc.

GH

[tim...]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

I am perfectly capable of acting like a grown-up by making my own
decisions and not wearing something I know to be useless.

but you are wearing it to protect *me*!

(and I am wearing mine to protect you)

It might be completely unnecessary for this mutual protection out in the
street, but on PT it's going to be necessary when we get back to even 50%
loadings

so we are all practicing now

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing bed wetters
who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for the other person?

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing
bed wetters who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for
the other person?

I'd expect them to be doing it because they understand that such masks
aren't PPE, and therefore they have to avoid the oncoming person. Or it
could just be that they want to keep 2m away.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

Demonstrating that they are unable to act like grown-ups.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 06:52:07 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing
bed wetters who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for
the other person?

I'd expect them to be doing it because they understand that such masks
aren't PPE, and therefore they have to avoid the oncoming person. Or it
could just be that they want to keep 2m away.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

Demonstrating that they are unable to act like grown-ups.

Grown ups understand risks are part of life and get on with it. Pensioners
with health complications are highly likely to die of flu yet you never saw a
flurry of masks and 2m distancing appear every time a flu bug passes through
even though they're highly contagious.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

Demonstrating that they are unable to act like grown-ups.

Grown ups understand risks are part of life and get on with it. Pensioners
with health complications are highly likely to die of flu yet you never saw a
flurry of masks and 2m distancing appear every time a flu bug passes through
even though they're highly contagious.

But this isn't seasonal flu (which those pensioners are highly likely to
have been vaccinated against), it's Coronovirus.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:22:10 +0100

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're

ignoring

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

Demonstrating that they are unable to act like grown-ups.

Grown ups understand risks are part of life and get on with it. Pensioners
with health complications are highly likely to die of flu yet you never saw a
flurry of masks and 2m distancing appear every time a flu bug passes through
even though they're highly contagious.

But this isn't seasonal flu (which those pensioners are highly likely to
have been vaccinated against), it's Coronovirus.

It is, a virus that unlike flu produces no symptoms in the vast majority of
people and in the ones that do get symptoms they're usually mild. Excuse me
if I don't panic about it. Sometimes I think that given half a chance the
government and BBC would play the Jaws music in the background whenever they
talked about it, its become that farcically overplayed.

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It is, a virus that unlike flu produces no symptoms in the vast majority of
people and in the ones that do get symptoms they're usually mild. Excuse me
if I don't panic about it. Sometimes I think that given half a chance the
government and BBC would play the Jaws music in the background whenever they
talked about it, its become that farcically overplayed.

Excess deaths this year, compared with the 5 year average, are greater
than the Blitz and more than half the UK civilian deaths in WW2. That's
not trivial or overplayed.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 23:14:02 +0100

Post by Clive D.W. Feather

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It is, a virus that unlike flu produces no symptoms in the vast majority of
people and in the ones that do get symptoms they're usually mild. Excuse me
if I don't panic about it. Sometimes I think that given half a chance the
government and BBC would play the Jaws music in the background whenever they
talked about it, its become that farcically overplayed.

Excess deaths this year, compared with the 5 year average, are greater
than the Blitz and more than half the UK civilian deaths in WW2. That's
not trivial or overplayed.

Deaths are up by 25% on this time last year. Its hardly the zombie apocalypse.
Yes it would probably be higher without lockdown but I suspect not much given
how many people ignored it anyway.

[Recliner]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 23:14:02 +0100

Post by Clive D.W. Feather

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It is, a virus that unlike flu produces no symptoms in the vast majority of
people and in the ones that do get symptoms they're usually mild. Excuse me
if I don't panic about it. Sometimes I think that given half a chance the
government and BBC would play the Jaws music in the background whenever they
talked about it, its become that farcically overplayed.

Excess deaths this year, compared with the 5 year average, are greater
than the Blitz and more than half the UK civilian deaths in WW2. That's
not trivial or overplayed.

Deaths are up by 25% on this time last year. Its hardly the zombie apocalypse.
Yes it would probably be higher without lockdown but I suspect not much given
how many people ignored it anyway.

Particularly, if the growing suspicions that the virus arrived here
earlier than previously thought, and via many more people, are proven
right, then the input data in the models was probably wrong. The virus
might have been spreading much longer, and with more points of origin,
than thought, and therefore more slowly than calculated. Or more
people than thought have fought it off, without showing antibodies to
it. So the IC model's apoplectic forecast of explosive growth might
have been based on the wrong initial data.

From your favourite tabloid:
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/05/the-costs-are-too-high-the-scientist-who-wants-lockdown-lifted-faster-sunetra-gupta>

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 14:37:34 +0100

Post by Recliner

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 23:14:02 +0100

Post by Clive D.W. Feather

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It is, a virus that unlike flu produces no symptoms in the vast majority of
people and in the ones that do get symptoms they're usually mild. Excuse me
if I don't panic about it. Sometimes I think that given half a chance the
government and BBC would play the Jaws music in the background whenever they
talked about it, its become that farcically overplayed.

Excess deaths this year, compared with the 5 year average, are greater
than the Blitz and more than half the UK civilian deaths in WW2. That's
not trivial or overplayed.

Deaths are up by 25% on this time last year. Its hardly the zombie apocalypse.
Yes it would probably be higher without lockdown but I suspect not much given
how many people ignored it anyway.

Particularly, if the growing suspicions that the virus arrived here
earlier than previously thought, and via many more people, are proven
right, then the input data in the models was probably wrong. The virus
might have been spreading much longer, and with more points of origin,
than thought, and therefore more slowly than calculated. Or more
people than thought have fought it off, without showing antibodies to
it. So the IC model's apoplectic forecast of explosive growth might
have been based on the wrong initial data.

Well indeed. And given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can
say that the model needed a bit of tweaking.

Post by Recliner
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/05/the-costs-are-too-high-the-scien
tist-who-wants-lockdown-lifted-faster-sunetra-gupta>

To be fair I mentally divide Guardian journalists into the science journos
who know what they're talking about the woken idiots who make up the rest.

[Roland Perry]

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

The question is, how much of that was sheer incompetence, and how much
trying to manage the degree of panic?

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.
The question is, how much of that was sheer incompetence, and how much
trying to manage the degree of panic?

Well, there's certainly plenty of incompetence on display in 'Appless
Hancock's department:
<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/19/100000-coronavirus-antibody-tests-gathering-dust-warehouses/>

Macclesfield-based medical supplier Avonchem is currently sitting on
100,000 antibody tests it bought from US firm CTK Biotech.

It says the tests could be used to help identify individuals who have had
the virus and are unlikely to get it again, giving employers, schools and
health services vital information needed to reopen the economy.

Avonchem contacted the Government in March, offering to supply the
finger-prick test, but has still not secured Public Health England (PHE) or
Department of Health (DoH) approval for the kits, despite the test being
approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
and being widely used in other countries.

The pin-prick test is 99.4 per cent accurate, according to independent
verification obtained by Avonchem, with results available in 10 to 15
minutes. But the firm now warns it may have to ship the tests overseas if
it can not secure the necessary approval for their use in this country in
the near future.

James Gray, the managing director of Avonchem, told The Telegraph: "We're
not interested in profiteering. We want to do the right thing and give the
Government the opportunity to use them, but their lack of interest and
engagement until now has been very sad and frustrating."

It comes as the Government faces growing questions about its approach to
the purchase of antibody testing, after it emerged that PHE's coronavirus
test misses a third of positive results.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner
Avonchem contacted the Government in March, offering to supply the
finger-prick test, but has still not secured Public Health England (PHE) or
Department of Health (DoH) approval for the kits, despite the test being
approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)

What jurisdiction are they based in?

Post by Recliner
and being widely used in other countries.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Avonchem contacted the Government in March, offering to supply the
finger-prick test, but has still not secured Public Health England (PHE) or
Department of Health (DoH) approval for the kits, despite the test being
approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)

What jurisdiction are they based in?

You've obviously been learning from Tim — who is 'they'?

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
and being widely used in other countries.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Avonchem contacted the Government in March, offering to supply the
finger-prick test, but has still not secured Public Health England (PHE) or
Department of Health (DoH) approval for the kits, despite the test being
approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)

What jurisdiction are they based in?

You've obviously been learning from Tim — who is 'they'?

MHRA, the word immediately before my "What..."

[Even I can work out the PHE and DoH are based in the UK]

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

UK
<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency>

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

UK
<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency>

I assumed that even Roland could work out that the MHRA was based in the
UK.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

UK
<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency>

I assumed that even Roland could work out that the MHRA was based in the
UK.

Though the following is relevant to your earlier post:

Published 29 May 2020

The MHRA is asking providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick, to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.

This does not affect rapid, point of care tests or laboratory tests
performed using blood taken from the vein.

The Agency has recently updated its guidance on home antibody testing
kits, to ensure that the public and industry have the latest information
on the reliability of test results and what they mean.

Graeme Tunbridge, MHRA Interim Director of Devices, comments:

Patient safety and public health are our main priorities and it is in
the interests of everyone for antibody tests to be as reliable and
meaningful as they can be.

There are several UK providers of testing services who offer COVID-19
antibody testing using a fingerprick sample of capillary blood collected
in a small container.

We are asking all providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.

Use of unvalidated sample types may lead to unreliable results and as
such we are working closely with the service providers, laboratories and
test manufacturers to resolve the regulatory and patient safety issues.

People who have purchased one of these sampling kits, and received an
antibody test result, should not consider the result to be reliable and
should not take any action based on it.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

UK
<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency>

I assumed that even Roland could work out that the MHRA was based in the
UK.

Not really. The type of test on offer isn't affected by this warning.

Post by Graeme Wall
Published 29 May 2020
The MHRA is asking providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick, to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.
This does not affect rapid, point of care tests or laboratory tests
performed using blood taken from the vein.
The Agency has recently updated its guidance on home antibody testing
kits, to ensure that the public and industry have the latest information
on the reliability of test results and what they mean.
Patient safety and public health are our main priorities and it is in
the interests of everyone for antibody tests to be as reliable and
meaningful as they can be.
There are several UK providers of testing services who offer COVID-19
antibody testing using a fingerprick sample of capillary blood collected
in a small container.
We are asking all providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.
Use of unvalidated sample types may lead to unreliable results and as
such we are working closely with the service providers, laboratories and
test manufacturers to resolve the regulatory and patient safety issues.
People who have purchased one of these sampling kits, and received an
antibody test result, should not consider the result to be reliable and
should not take any action based on it.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall
We are asking all providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.
Use of unvalidated sample types may lead to unreliable results and as
such we are working closely with the service providers, laboratories
and test manufacturers to resolve the regulatory and patient safety
issues.
People who have purchased one of these sampling kits, and received an
antibody test result, should not consider the result to be reliable and
should not take any action based on it.

Ah!! So there is another side to this story. I thought so.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
We are asking all providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.
Use of unvalidated sample types may lead to unreliable results and as
such we are working closely with the service providers, laboratories
and test manufacturers to resolve the regulatory and patient safety
issues.
People who have purchased one of these sampling kits, and received an
antibody test result, should not consider the result to be reliable and
should not take any action based on it.

Ah!! So there is another side to this story. I thought so.

<Sigh> Yet again you've failed to read something you're arguing with. You
very obviously didn't read the original story. I suppose it saves time:
you've already decided to argue, so why waste time reading the thing you're
arguing against?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
We are asking all providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.
Use of unvalidated sample types may lead to unreliable results and as
such we are working closely with the service providers, laboratories
and test manufacturers to resolve the regulatory and patient safety
issues.
People who have purchased one of these sampling kits, and received an
antibody test result, should not consider the result to be reliable and
should not take any action based on it.

Ah!! So there is another side to this story. I thought so.

<Sigh> Yet again you've failed to read something you're arguing with. You
you've already decided to argue, so why waste time reading the thing you're
arguing against?

There's nothing in the story from The Telegraph which confirms their
test is *not* one of the kind the MHRA are now saying not to use.

What is might say is their importation was probably before the quoted
MHRA doubts at the end of May - the month of March was mentioned. (And
they've been "collecting dust" so won't have arrived recently).

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
We are asking all providers of laboratory-based COVID-19 antibody
testing services using capillary blood collected by a fingerprick to
temporarily stop providing this service until home collection of this
sample type has been properly assessed and validated for use with these
laboratory tests.
Use of unvalidated sample types may lead to unreliable results and as
such we are working closely with the service providers, laboratories
and test manufacturers to resolve the regulatory and patient safety
issues.
People who have purchased one of these sampling kits, and received an
antibody test result, should not consider the result to be reliable and
should not take any action based on it.

Ah!! So there is another side to this story. I thought so.

<Sigh> Yet again you've failed to read something you're arguing with. You
you've already decided to argue, so why waste time reading the thing you're
arguing against?

There's nothing in the story from The Telegraph which confirms their
test is *not* one of the kind the MHRA are now saying not to use.

I think you need a drive to Barnard Castle. Then read it again. Or for the
first time.

Post by Roland Perry
What is might say is their importation was probably before the quoted
MHRA doubts at the end of May - the month of March was mentioned. (And
they've been "collecting dust" so won't have arrived recently).

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
There's nothing in the story from The Telegraph which confirms their
test is *not* one of the kind the MHRA are now saying not to use.

I think you need a drive to Barnard Castle. Then read it again. Or for the
first time.

Please quote the Telegraph text which supports your proposition.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

UK
<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-p
roducts-regulatory-agency>

I assumed that even Roland could work out that the MHRA was based in the
UK.

You'd have saved typing by saying "UK" the first time I asked.

Still having a bad day?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

UK
<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-pr
oducts-regulatory-agency>

I wonder what have to say about their classification of these tests as
OK being dismissed by other parts of the medical establishment?

Or are we only hearing one side of the story.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

[Recliner]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

As often mentioned, it's best to look at excess deaths, to avoid arguments
about whether death certificates are consistent or accurate. The BBC web
site has an interactive map that lets you compare the excess deaths per
capita in any chosen area with the national average:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

In most of the country, the excess deaths are now running at a low rate,
but I find that in some parts of the country that were hit hard and early,
the excess deaths are now negative. In other words, the virus claimed the
lives of some of the frail people who would have died in June a couple of
months early. Ealing and Hounslow, boroughs adjacent to Heathrow, are
examples where the current death rate is below their norm.

But, to pick a purely random example, County Durham, still has a high CV-19
death rate, so excess deaths are still significant.

[tim...]

Post by Recliner

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

As often mentioned, it's best to look at excess deaths, to avoid arguments
about whether death certificates are consistent or accurate. The BBC web
site has an interactive map that lets you compare the excess deaths per
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

but only UK

not for comparison with ROW

[Recliner]

Post by tim...

Post by Recliner

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

As often mentioned, it's best to look at excess deaths, to avoid arguments
about whether death certificates are consistent or accurate. The BBC web
site has an interactive map that lets you compare the excess deaths per
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

but only UK
not for comparison with ROW

True. But it's useful to compare different UK areas. There are other sites
that compare the UK with other countries.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus? Some consequences are well known, but it's becoming
clearer that it affects the blood as well as the lungs. Indeed, the
effect on the lungs may itself often be due to changes in the blood.

Meanwhile, if an affected person is run over by a bus, do they test the
corpse for virus? The UK at least has been severely rationing tests
until quite recently.

[tim...]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us

the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other
countries.

The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive

That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely
undiagnosed

and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

tim

[Recliner]

Post by tim...

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us
the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other
countries.
The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death
some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive
That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely
undiagnosed
and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing
comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't
keep the daily death statistics.

[tim...]

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us
the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other
countries.
The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death
some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive
That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely
undiagnosed
and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing
comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't
keep the daily death statistics.

doesn't need to be daily

quarterly figures (Jan-Mar, Apr-Jun etc) would be sufficient

[Recliner]

Post by tim...

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us
the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other
countries.
The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death
some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive
That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely
undiagnosed
and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing
comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't
keep the daily death statistics.

doesn't need to be daily
quarterly figures (Jan-Mar, Apr-Jun etc) would be sufficient

That would be too coarse, but monthly might be enough. The Economist has
some weekly analysis:
<https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries>

[Roland Perry]

Post by tim...
some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID
death even if the patient has tested positive

Really?

[tim...]

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive

Really

apparently

that's how some countries have absurdly low figures for deaths

[Graeme Wall]

Post by tim...

Post by Recliner

Post by tim...
some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID
death even if the patient has tested positive

Really

apparently
that's how some countries have absurdly low figures for deaths

Cite?

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has
meant their infection rate has merely plateaued, and is stuck at around
50 per million, UK is currently regarded as disastrous at 40 (down from
a peak of 80), most of the rest of Europe is now below 10.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:03:38 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has

Voluntary policies. They treated their population as adults, not naughty
children who needed to be coralled at home.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:03:38 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has

Voluntary policies. They treated their population as adults, not naughty
children who needed to be coralled at home.

Here, of course, they had to allow for people like you.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:03:38 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has

Voluntary policies. They treated their population as adults, not naughty
children who needed to be coralled at home.

And look how successful that was.

Actually, not bad compared to the "take no action at all" scenario, even
though they nevertheless have the worst figures in Europe.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:03:38 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has

Voluntary policies. They treated their population as adults, not naughty
children who needed to be coralled at home.

And look how successful that was.
Actually, not bad compared to the "take no action at all" scenario, even
though they nevertheless have the worst figures in Europe.

Which 'they' are you referring to in that statement? Presumably not
Sweden, whose figures are better than the UK.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:03:38 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

A similar prediction was also made for Sweden.

Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has

Voluntary policies. They treated their population as adults, not naughty
children who needed to be coralled at home.

And look how successful that was.
Actually, not bad compared to the "take no action at all" scenario, even
though they nevertheless have the worst figures in Europe.

Which 'they' are you referring to in that statement?

Sweden.

Post by Recliner
Presumably not Sweden, whose figures are better than the UK.

But are significantly worse than other r27 countries.

ps In case you hadn't noticed, we left Europe.

[tim...]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 06:52:07 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing
bed wetters who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for
the other person?

I'd expect them to be doing it because they understand that such masks
aren't PPE, and therefore they have to avoid the oncoming person. Or it
could just be that they want to keep 2m away.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

Demonstrating that they are unable to act like grown-ups.

Grown ups understand risks are part of life and get on with it. Pensioners
with health complications are highly likely to die of flu yet you never saw a
flurry of masks and 2m distancing appear every time a flu bug passes through
even though they're highly contagious.

because most of them went for their free inoculation

HTH

tim

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:47:56 +0100

Post by tim...

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 06:52:07 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing
bed wetters who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for
the other person?

I'd expect them to be doing it because they understand that such masks
aren't PPE, and therefore they have to avoid the oncoming person. Or it
could just be that they want to keep 2m away.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

Demonstrating that they are unable to act like grown-ups.

Grown ups understand risks are part of life and get on with it. Pensioners
with health complications are highly likely to die of flu yet you never saw a
flurry of masks and 2m distancing appear every time a flu bug passes through
even though they're highly contagious.

because most of them went for their free inoculation

Which often doesn't work and frequently makes people ill so they don't bother.

HTH.

[Recliner]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:36:03 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?

Of course it hasn't got through. Do you think all those mask wearing bed wetters
who cross the road when someone approaches them do it for the other person?

No, but they may have noticed that you weren't wearing a mask. They crossed
the road for protection from *you*.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Roland Perry
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

Plenty of the general public are making sensible decisions - they're ignoring
the 2m nonsense and not wearing idiotic masks.

[tim...]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by Recliner

Post by MissRiaElaine
The silly cloth things that people wear walking around Tesco are useless.

On what basis did you reach that conclusion? As long as they're at
least two layers thick, they'll do the job they're intended to do.

Lull people into a false sense of security, yes. They're excellent at
that. I for one am not so easily fooled.

Perhaps the message that they aren't intended to protect the wearer,
hasn't got through?
This is a wonderful commentary on the ability of the general public to
"act like grown-ups" and make sensible decisions based on the perceived
risks, when they fall at the first fence like this.

+1

[Roland Perry]

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...

Post by MissRiaElaine

Post by tim...
good god
I was expecting something functionally superior

Functional..? NONE of the ridiculous things being worn by the public
at large are remotely functional.

You're wrong
some designs do have filtered vents which (attempt) to safely solve
the condensation problem
Whether they actually work, or not
I have no idea

They are medical masks and should be reserved for medical professionals.

No they aren't. The majority are DIY dusk-masks, and the vent is to let
the moist air out.

[Arthur Conan Doyle]

Post by Roland Perry
No they aren't. The majority are DIY dusk-masks, and the vent is to let
the moist air out.

Which kind of puts to rest the argument that masks protect others.

[Recliner]

Post by Arthur Conan Doyle

Post by Roland Perry
No they aren't. The majority are DIY dusk-masks, and the vent is to let
the moist air out.

Which kind of puts to rest the argument that masks protect others.

The moist exhaled air will obviously get out anyway, but any form of face
covering that makes the droplets follow a more tortuous route will reduce
the distance they are projected. That's all that these face coverings for
the general public are expected to do. They are not medical grade PPE.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Arthur Conan Doyle

Post by Roland Perry
No they aren't. The majority are DIY dusk-masks, and the vent is to let
the moist air out.

Which kind of puts to rest the argument that masks protect others.

That's just one type of mask, and even so it will help capture the worst
of any coughs or sneezes, and also help stop the wearer touching their
face and transferring virus to the hands, to then spread on hard
surfaces.

[Basil Jet]

Post by tim...
The hospital appt was a bust, they had cancelled it without telling me.
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

You were clashing with their TikTok obligations.