Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Otis said:

 

Still living rent free in your head. I don't think there's a day go by that youdon't mention this.

It's utterly hilarious that's why. Almost as amusing as your revelation that lockdown doesn't work because people are still being infected. 

 

3 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

You can be as pompous as you like

Eh?...

 

32 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

Yep it’s a load of bollocks. No justification for further restrictions.

Great reasoning.

 

4 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

You can be as pompous as you like but there’s actually zero justification for what has been announced.

 

I'd suggest that an emergent variant that we know nothing little about with scores of changes to the spike protein, over fifty mutations, the potential for vaccine evasion and possibly treble the infection rate of Delta is every justification for the precautionary measures that have been announced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
Just now, Legend_in_blue said:

 

Can't believe these slides weren't used in the presser either.

 

Tailor made for it they are I tell you!

 

Image

That the recommendation for mandatory facemasks is made prior to a predicted surge in cases? 

 

Why do you think that was? Think hard now. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kyleolly

kyleolly

Posted
Posted

So they want to stop the spread at large events, non vaxed if they don't take the piss will have proof they don't have covid. Double vaxed don't have to do a test so there's a possibility they could have covid when entering a football ground for example so it will be the double vaxed spreading covid

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
reynard

reynard

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Those tests were carried out at test centres though and required someone to watch you do the test. Then they independently sent you a result.
 

Lateral flows are self reported now. You can literally scan in the barcode and enter the result without doing anything to the test. 

Well maybe we should return to that process to access more events?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Farrington fox

Farrington fox

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Line-X said:

That the recommendation for mandatory facemasks is made prior to a predicted surge in cases? 

 

Why do you think that was? Think hard now. 

Or, it could demonstrate they don't prevent a rise in cases, surely. Then the argument would be... Cases would have been higher without them, which surely can't be proved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted
Just now, Farrington fox said:

Or, it could demonstrate they don't prevent a rise in cases, surely. Then the argument would be... Cases would have been higher without them, which surely can't be proved.

You can’t prove a negative 

annoying for whichever argument you’re having and what side you sit on that debate …..

 

we could go back to the seat belt analogy …….or cooking meat properly. I mean my cat eats raw meat …….

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fox_favourite

fox_favourite

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Line-X said:

That the recommendation for mandatory facemasks is made prior to a predicted surge in cases? 

 

Why do you think that was? Think hard now. 

Okay - so why pre covid, did we cover our mouths when we cough and sneeze? Would you be happy at the time for someone to sneeze in your direction without doing so? We did it to be courteous to others to hoped stop them getting your cold and spreading germs. Was it 100% effective - no. Did it limit chances - yes 

 

Same with masks - it won’t stop it 100% but it will limit it transmission. Surely logically if you put a cover over your face and you cough you are catching some of the particles and not just coughing in peoples faces. 
 

the graphs you presented only show that masks were introduced when there was an upward trend. They weren’t the cause or the full solution but if everyone didn’t have masks it would be a lot worse. I’m not basing it on scientific knowledge, not politically motivated at all, I’m just basing it on pure logic. 

Edited by fox_favourite
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Or, it could demonstrate they don't prevent a rise in cases, surely. Then the argument would be... Cases would have been higher without them, which surely can't be proved.

It's your initial statement that is in contention here and can't be proved. As the one making the claim, the burden of proof would be incumbent upon you to "demonstrate" otherwise. 

 

Facemasks are a preventative measure employed against a virus which is known to be transmitted predominately by aerosols as opposed to fomites. Reducing disease spread requires two things: limiting contacts of infected individuals via physical distancing and other measures and reducing the transmission probability per contact. The consilience/preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high. There are studies that demonstrate this and epidemiological frameworks developed to quantify effectivity. I can refer you to these if you wish.

 

Returning to your claim that it could demonstrate that they don't prevent a rise in cases - you'll need to produce your data showing a negative relationship. You can't prove an absent. 

 

 

Edited by Line-X
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, fox_favourite said:

Okay - so why pre covid, did we cover our mouths when we cough and sneeze? Would you be happy at the time for someone to sneeze in your direction without doing so? We did it to be courteous to others to hoped stop them getting your cold and spreading germs. Was it 100% effective - no. Did it limit chances - yes 

 

Same with masks - it won’t stop it 100% but it will limit it transmission. Surely logically if you put a cover over your face and you cough you are catching some of the particles and not just coughing in peoples faces. 
 

the graphs you presented only show that masks were introduced when there was an upward trend. They weren’t the cause or the full solution but if everyone didn’t have masks it would be a lot worse. I’m not basing it on scientific knowledge, not politically motivated at all, I’m just basing it on pure logic. 

I think that you've just quoted the wrong person. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ric Flair

Ric Flair

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, kyleolly said:

So they want to stop the spread at large events, non vaxed if they don't take the piss will have proof they don't have covid. Double vaxed don't have to do a test so there's a possibility they could have covid when entering a football ground for example so it will be the double vaxed spreading covid

Yeah, and if this new strain is as concerning as is being made out to be then being double jabbed won't mean a lot as what's the point in a passport. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...