Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

There is a 'false sense of security' argument against masks but it gets mixed up with all the humbug reasons not to support mask wearing in this country. So I will keep an open mind about how masks and the attitudes around them may evolve.

They don't help. This virus doesn't just enter through the nose and mouth and the masks most people are wearing are not going to block the virus anyway. A lot of people don't know how to put them on properly, hence the WHO advice. As you say they give people a false sense of security and even putting the mask on involves more touching of your face.
 
There is a 'false sense of security' argument against masks but it gets mixed up with all the humbug reasons not to support mask wearing in this country. So I will keep an open mind about how masks and the attitudes around them may evolve.

I can certainly see their advantages but I really think its need to be done within a cultural understanding of how they are used and to what aim. I don't think we have that in Europe at the moment whereas they may have in places such as China. My gut feeling is that the UK government has it right at the moment with their advice but quite frankly I'm no more qualified to make this judgement than the average man who shouldn't be on the Clapham Omnibus without a very good reason.
 
It was part of the cultural resistance to wearing them. Part of a previous age. Over. The bullshit will linger on, but necessity is the mother of invention and we will see plenty of countries make this new choice in the weeks ahead.
 
It was part of the cultural resistance to wearing them. Part of a previous age. Over. The bullshit will linger on, but necessity is the mother of invention and we will see plenty of countries make this new choice in the weeks ahead.

I've mentioned on here previously that I like the idea of masks in general as a good manners thing if nothing else. We are very poor in a lot of the West in managing winter colds and flu etc. People spluttering everywhere at their desks or on bus etc. I do think there is something in wearing masks and this could lead to adopting this behaviour. I just think that from personal observation people are going to need to understand how to use them and they're limitations.

One thing I just can't shake though is this feeling that if they could be proven to work than why haven't they? The market for managing coughs and colds is massive in the wealthiest countries, absolutely vast. If a mask manufacturer could say 'yes our product works and here's the proof', why has this not already happened? Why is it not happening now?

There is a solution in here somewhere.
 
I consider the idea that they dont help to be complete bullshit.


I was skeptical about their general use, but it does seem they do reduce cross infection.

In hospital in the past if someone had flu we'd make then wear a mask in the department to lessen them spreading it, so maybe it doesn't lessen the risk to the person wearing it, but makes droplet spread less likely surely.
 
The WHO has advised people not to wear them. I can see it's a natural human reaction to want to wear them but the cynic in me suggests most people are wearing them to protect themselves, not others. They're not protecting themselves, in fact putting themselves more at risk.

it seemed to me that the WHO was too slow to declare a pandemic and this may have given western countries a false sense of security (i may be completely wrong on this) and the advice on masks seems also to be behind the curve
 
I was skeptical about their general use, but it does seem they do reduce cross infection.

In hospital in the past if someone had flu we'd make then wear a mask in the department to lessen them spreading it, it's just the same surely? Maybe it doesn't lessen the risk to the person wearing it, but makes droplet spread less likely surely.

The UK and WHO guidance is not to bother but if it makes people feel safer then so be it!

At a Downing Street briefing on Friday, England's Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jonathan Van Tam made clear: "There is no evidence that general wearing of face masks by members of the public who are well affects the spread of the disease in our society."

Professor Van Tam acknowledged that use of face masks is "wired into" some cultures in Asia, but added: "In terms of the hard evidence, and what the UK government recommends, we do not recommend face masks for general wearing."

Public Health England says there is little evidence of widespread benefit from wearing masks outside clinical settings.
It said: "Face masks must be worn correctly, changed frequently, removed properly, disposed of safely and used in combination with good universal hygiene behaviour in order for them to be effective.
 
Private Eye piece:

Numbers game
SO far this year, as the Eye went to press 159,987 people had died in the UK, 1,228 (and rising rapidly) with coronavirus, and 158,759 of things that don’t make the news. Assorted Imperial College professors predict that if we continue lockdown until June and turn the NHS into a Covid-19 service, deaths with coronavirus could be restricted to 5,700-20,000. Roughly, out of every 10,000 people in the UK, 9,996-9,999 would not die with coronavirus.

However, all 10,000 will be affected by social and economic lockdown, and many by cuts to other health and social services. Far more than 5,700 could die from the side effects of our strategy. And yet if the government had continued with its “herd immunity” plan (as Donald Trump is doing), 260,000 people could have died with the virus. Some may have died soon of something else, but the headline figure was a little on the high side even for Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s brain (“chief adviser”, surely? Ed). This sudden surge in demand would crash the health service; hence the decision to crash the economy instead. But could we have stopped the pandemic if we’d got a grip earlier?
Home has always been a risky place to be confined in, particularly for those who lack the luxury of space. Falls and fractures are likely to increase, with a toxic combination of a crowded house, toys and toddlers on the stairs, anger, alcohol and domestic abuse. Stray cigarette butts will start some house fires. And an estimated 7,100 people may die prematurely from this home confinement due to poor diet, poverty, inactivity, rickets and suicide. If we focus all our resources and attention on reducing the risk of Covid-19, other equally unpleasant risks may rise up. Child abuse is a major concern.

On the plus side, home confinement is leading to a reduction in pollution, littering, road traffic accidents and dog shit on the pavements (only one a day allowed), and an increase in birdsong and the life expectancy of asthmatics (if they escape the virus). It’s beautiful out there without humans.
 
Private Eye piece:



keeping deaths down to '5,700' is looking rather laughable now.

And lets not forget PE was a significant driver in support for Andrew Wakefields MMR bullshit
 
These sorts of masks are fast becoming the new normal in countries that are planning ways to slightly relax their lockdowns.

The UK seems especially resistant to the idea. I will be interested to see whether this attitude persists.

i have been wearing a surgical one, they are very uncomfortable,, sticky, make it harder to breathe if you have any such issues, thats indoors, i suspect wearing it outside would even more alienating, etc. esp on a nice day
 
It was part of the cultural resistance to wearing them. Part of a previous age. Over. The bullshit will linger on, but necessity is the mother of invention and we will see plenty of countries make this new choice in the weeks ahead.

The chinese students won't come back to study unless they consider we are using them and effectively.
 
The important qualifier in the UK govt advice is 'in people who are well'. We know that people who appear and feel well ,may, in fact, not be well. And if they are wearing a mask, they're less likely to spread the disease in the asymptomatic stage. That's what this is about.

Yes, and one of the reasons we are only hearing more about it now is that there was a general reluctance to focus properly on the asymptomatic side of this, despite signs of its relevance since the early days.
 
It's just preventing you giving it to me. And even then it's pretty much pointless given the quality of your fucking mask. As you were.
Reducing onward transmission is the whole point of the exercise.

It's not entirely pointless (DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2013.43, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002618), it's source control; drive R0 towards unity, or lower. Not just for those recovering but the asymptomatic too.

Sure, efficacy clearly improves with fit and density of the material used, the aim being to dampen gas cloud momentum and thus curb the propagation of the turbulent multiphase, virion infected, expiratory droplet cloud (DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.4756). But a cycling grade pollution mask which filters substantially at PM10 (better, down to PM2.5) will make a significant difference to transmission rate given the bulk of longer lived transmissible expiratory droplets are at that scale or greater dimensions.
 
it seemed to me that the WHO was too slow to declare a pandemic and this may have given western countries a false sense of security (i may be completely wrong on this) and the advice on masks seems also to be behind the curve
Exactly this. The WHO advised against closing China's borders at a time when doing so would have stopped all of this, so I'm not inclined to pay much attention to them. I suspect the guidance about face masks is largely because there aren't enough of them to go round so telling people to wear them would cause fear amongst those without.
 
Reducing onward transmission is the whole point of the exercise.

It's not entirely pointless (DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2013.43, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002618), it's source control; drive R0 towards unity, or lower. Not just for those recovering but the asymptomatic too.

Sure, efficacy clearly improves with fit and density of the material used, the aim being to dampen gas cloud momentum and thus curb the propagation of the turbulent multiphase, virion infected, expiratory droplet cloud (DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.4756). But a cycling grade pollution mask which filters substantially at PM10 (better, down to PM2.5) will make a significant difference to transmission rate given the bulk of longer lived transmissible expiratory droplets are at that scale or greater dimensions.

I have to admit I didn't understand most of that but my god you know your stuff!

Are you a scientist/doctor?
 
Reducing onward transmission is the whole point of the exercise.

It's not entirely pointless (DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2013.43, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002618), it's source control; drive R0 towards unity, or lower. Not just for those recovering but the asymptomatic too.

Sure, efficacy clearly improves with fit and density of the material used, the aim being to dampen gas cloud momentum and thus curb the propagation of the turbulent multiphase, virion infected, expiratory droplet cloud (DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.4756). But a cycling grade pollution mask which filters substantially at PM10 (better, down to PM2.5) will make a significant difference to transmission rate given the bulk of longer lived transmissible expiratory droplets are at that scale or greater dimensions.

i presume this thing would be quite effective (filters are for aerosol paint) but i’m not sure i could take the strange looks

064F7534-0726-43A4-AEA6-C0A60177640B.jpeg
 
Private Eye piece:



Actually from my experience at work there's more dogshit than before and still plenty of litter (now with added disposable gloves and masks) - in an area close to local shops anyway.
 
The important qualifier in the UK govt advice is 'in people who are well'. We know that people who appear and feel well ,may, in fact, not be well. And if they are wearing a mask, they're less likely to spread the disease in the asymptomatic stage. That's what this is about.

Good point. However I did see an interview with a senior bod at the WHO who was adamant that the cons outweighed the pros. That basically it was a mental safety blanket in most cases. I assume to become a senior bod at the WHO you should know what you're talking about. I also remember during SARS which was much less wide-spread hearing the same. That masks didn't really do anything. Given that there was no shortage of masks during that it kind of dispels the theory that the reason governments are advising against using them is to leave a bigger supply for health professionals.
 
I actually bought oat milk a couple of weeks ago to see what it was like, in case it became difficult to get normal semi skimmed.

It's OK in coffee, but not so good in cereal, and fortunately it doesn't seem like there's any problem getting normal milk.

sanctimonious grin
Sorry, didn't see you were grinning under your mask :D
 
The NHS England data that I have been moaning about not having access to in recent weeks is actually available, yay.

This data will allow me to build a picture of hospital deaths where the date is the actual date of death, rather than the date of reporting. Lag is still there, but unlike the daily overall numbers, the accuracy of past days numbers will improve over time.


When time allows, I will try to turn this data into something more instantly readable. How quickly that happens likely depends on how interesting the picture that emerges from my first poke at this turns out to be. Its possibly still a bit early to get the most out of even the March figures, not sure yet.

Obviously this data is only for hospitals so I'll have to merge in ONS data too to get the most complete picture possible, or frankly I could jsut wait a very long time and use the ONS data on its own.
 
Back
Top Bottom