Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Some perspective

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Midsmartin
Lemon Slice
Posts: 777
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 7:18 am
Has thanked: 211 times
Been thanked: 491 times

Re: Some perspective

#450010

Postby Midsmartin » October 14th, 2021, 8:11 am

According to
https://fullfact.org/online/covid-death-rate-under-60/
4717 under 60s had died with covid by January 2021. It'll be higher than that now of course.

I highly recommend "more or less"on radio 4 for their covid coverage. An interesting number was that where people have died with covid, on average it's taken ten years of their life, made up of a large number of more elderly, and a smaller number of the young who had their whole lives ahead.

It seems almost diagnostic of the anti Vax people that numbers are misused or misunderstood, to the point where they quote absolute fiction.

Ok my local area "what's on" Facebook group only this morning is someone sharing a covid conspiracy video so obviously fake that it might appear to be satire, yet some people lap up every word without question. It's just bizarre how they utterly reject science but accept any old Horlicks they see from a passing nutter.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10366
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3599 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Some perspective

#450019

Postby Arborbridge » October 14th, 2021, 8:56 am

As regards someone who is anti-mask wearing, would they put their "principles" ahead of a notice such as this?:

As a courtesy to each other and to help us provide a comfortable and enjoyable experience for everyone, please wear a face covering out of consideration for those around you and be mindful of others and their personal space when moving around the theatre and queueing for bars and toilets.


In theatres there is a very hgh compliance with such requests, but I cannot help wondering about those who simply refuse or "accidentally on purpose didn't see the notice". To my mind, it shows a lack of common decency to refuse to wear a mask when it's been made clear that the operators of the venu expect you too - how can people be so thick skinned as to ignore it? - though some do as I recently observed in a London venu.

If you don't agree with what you have been asked to do, just don't go.

Arb.

redsturgeon
Lemon Half
Posts: 8910
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 1309 times
Been thanked: 3665 times

Re: Some perspective

#450024

Postby redsturgeon » October 14th, 2021, 9:19 am

Arborbridge wrote:As regards someone who is anti-mask wearing, would they put their "principles" ahead of a notice such as this?:

As a courtesy to each other and to help us provide a comfortable and enjoyable experience for everyone, please wear a face covering out of consideration for those around you and be mindful of others and their personal space when moving around the theatre and queueing for bars and toilets.


In theatres there is a very hgh compliance with such requests, but I cannot help wondering about those who simply refuse or "accidentally on purpose didn't see the notice". To my mind, it shows a lack of common decency to refuse to wear a mask when it's been made clear that the operators of the venu expect you too - how can people be so thick skinned as to ignore it? - though some do as I recently observed in a London venu.

If you don't agree with what you have been asked to do, just don't go.

Arb.


I'm sorry Arb but my experience has been the total opposite of this. My one visit to the theatre a month or so ago I was surprised that maybe 10% of people were wearing masks. I had gone to see Russell Brand so I thought it was just that demographic. However mrs RS went to watch the new Bond film last night and literally nobody (except her and her friend) had masks on.

Another friend went to our local theatre last week and she was the only person wearing a mask...peer pressure eventually took its toll and she removed her mask halfway through the show.

I agree with you though, anywhere I am asked to wear a mask, I do so, it is common courtesy and no inconvenience to me at all.

John

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10366
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3599 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Some perspective

#450027

Postby Arborbridge » October 14th, 2021, 9:34 am

redsturgeon wrote:


I'm sorry Arb but my experience has been the total opposite of this. My one visit to the theatre a month or so ago I was surprised that maybe 10% of people were wearing masks. I had gone to see Russell Brand so I thought it was just that demographic. However mRs RS went to watch the new Bond film last night and literally nobody (except her and her friend) had masks on.

Another friend went to our local theatre last week and she was the only person wearing a mask...peer pressure eventually took its toll and she removed her mask halfway through the show.

I agree with you though, anywhere I am asked to wear a mask, I do so, it is common courtesy and no inconvenience to me at all.

John


That's sad. Maybe venue and demographic do have an effect, but not entirely predictably. I haven't yet been to a cinema - my outings have been either opera or ballet. I am hoping to get to see Bond next week, so that will be interesting.

I had an annoying "fellow attendee" recently. We were in Birmingham where the seating is conservative and socially distanced, and people are still asked to wear masks. However, an elderly couple to our right, took it upon themselves to break the seating layout and sat next-but-one to my wife. If that weren't bad enough, she spent the whole evening without a mask on! We were put in the position of either complaining or sucking it up, and being terribly British, decided to do the latter.

In croded areas, masking wearing is still fairly high, but has dropped off somewhat - I'm thinking of trains, and tube and station concourses. The compliance does seem to related to the crowdedness, which is understandable. But there are always members of the awkward squad who think they should be different.


Arb.

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7962
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 984 times
Been thanked: 3643 times

Re: Some perspective

#450028

Postby swill453 » October 14th, 2021, 9:38 am

Arborbridge wrote:However, an elderly couple to our right, took it upon themselves to break the seating layout and sat next-but-one to my wife. If that weren't bad enough, she spent the whole evening without a mask on! We were put in the position of either complaining or sucking it up, and being terribly British, decided to do the latter.

In some ways that's the logical action. A face-to-face, potentially heated, confrontation would increase the infection risk (to all parties) far beyond the passive scenario.

Scott.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18674
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6559 times

Re: Some perspective

#450097

Postby Lootman » October 14th, 2021, 12:49 pm

Arborbridge wrote:In crowded areas, masking wearing is still fairly high, but has dropped off somewhat - I'm thinking of trains, and tube and station concourses. The compliance does seem to related to the crowdedness, which is understandable.

I might be imagining this but I have noticed on recent train journeys, that almost everyone takes a lot of food and drink onto trains. The cynic in me thinks this might be so that passengers can "legitimately" not wear a mask for the entire journey because they are eating and drinking.

I wear one when in an indoors public place unless I am eating or drinking. I have seen people raising their mask after taking each mouthful of something but frankly that is too much faff.

My one sin is that I will wear a mask only over my mouth if otherwise my glasses steam up. Not being able to see where I am going is a bigger hazard than that of infection, and most exhaled matter is from the mouth and not the nose anyway. In 19 months I have only ever had one person complain to me that my nose wasn't covered.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10366
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3599 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Some perspective

#450163

Postby Arborbridge » October 14th, 2021, 4:59 pm

Lootman wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:In crowded areas, masking wearing is still fairly high, but has dropped off somewhat - I'm thinking of trains, and tube and station concourses. The compliance does seem to related to the crowdedness, which is understandable.

I might be imagining this but I have noticed on recent train journeys, that almost everyone takes a lot of food and drink onto trains. The cynic in me thinks this might be so that passengers can "legitimately" not wear a mask for the entire journey because they are eating and drinking.

I wear one when in an indoors public place unless I am eating or drinking. I have seen people raising their mask after taking each mouthful of something but frankly that is too much faff.

My one sin is that I will wear a mask only over my mouth if otherwise my glasses steam up. Not being able to see where I am going is a bigger hazard than that of infection, and most exhaled matter is from the mouth and not the nose anyway. In 19 months I have only ever had one person complain to me that my nose wasn't covered.


People (unless fanatics) do not complain, though you might get a black look ;) The steaming up is a nuisance, but I've found that if I put my glasses slightly lower down the nose it will overlap the mask material and stop the misting (probably by pinching in a little). I guess it all depends on the glasses, mask and nose!

There's a mixed picture on trains - on my line, probably the mask wearing has dropped to between a third and a half from 80-90% months ago. On the tube it's better.
I hadn't noticed any "eaters" other than the usual grabbing something on a train home (which smelly habit I utterly dislike) so maybe not many are using this as an excuse. Again, different regions, different habits, I suppose. Demographics play a part: best are the younger people and elderly, worst are the ones in the middle 20-45s. This group contains many guffawers, laughers and drinkers who are to my mind dangerous hot spots and worth moving to another carriage to avoid if possible.

I'm at the Royal Opera House soon in which we are requested to wear masks - that'll be interesting to report back on. I expect almost full compliance in the auditorium, but very little in the foyer (judging from an outing the Sadlers Wells) - we'll see.

Arb.

onthemove
Lemon Slice
Posts: 540
Joined: June 24th, 2017, 4:03 pm
Has thanked: 722 times
Been thanked: 471 times

Re: Some perspective

#450182

Postby onthemove » October 14th, 2021, 6:40 pm

Arborbridge wrote:And as for anti-social types refusing to wear masks on some sort of misguided principle?


I can't help feel there's a bit of irony here.

I'm certainly vocally against mandatory mask wearing requirements and don't wear one in the supermarket, and so I guess that means I must be an "anti-social" type in your view. :(

But here's the irony - choosing not to wear a mask is now legally permitted, just the same as choosing to go to the opera and such like.

In the past few weeks the only thing that I've done that wouldn't have been technically permitted during the first lockdown in 2020 is go out running for 10 minutes more than the permitted 1 hour :o ! (Actually, strictly speaking I don't carry a watch while out running, and a few times I may have been over the requisite hour during the official lockdown). And in the past few weeks, in addition to the run, I may also have been out for a walk for around 30 minutes on the same day. All on my own, all outside and away from people.

I'm still working from home and only once visited a relation to drop something off where I briefly stood outside at the door with 2m distance between us and didn't go inside.

I haven't been to any cinema, opera, theatre or anything like that. The only place I've been to is the supermarket, late in the evening when it's largely quiet, it's a large supermarket with very good ventilation. I largely avoid aisles when there are more than one or two people in them, and generally hold my breath when quickly walking past people, and I don't linger in proximity to other people. I also still put my trolley at the side of the checkout and stand at the end like they requested you do during the lockdowns, and still use my keys to press the buttons on the card machine rather than touching them directly with my fingers. I also use hand santiser on the way in.

But no, I didn't wear a mask, so clearly in your view I'm some sort of anti-social type.

But here's the thing...

In other posts on this thread you've been happily recounting your visits to venues where the density of people is much higher than the supermarket, but let's not forget, mask wearing might help reduce transmission, but it certainly doesn't eliminate risk, by a long shot - not even risk of airbourne transmission. In my experience those wearing masks tend to do risker things that they wouldn't have done without a mask, largely negating the overall benefit in terms of covid transmission risk (my mum is a good example, a couple of months ago in the supermarket I held back to keep a distance while some other people passed, but my mum just pushed straight past them, practically brushing against them... when I caught up with her and she asked what had kept me, I explained I was courteously allowing some distance to let the people pass, to which mum replied, 'oh, I'm wearing a mask so I'm OK'. :roll: )

Anyhow, back to my point ... I think it's probably a fairly safe bet that my weekly activity over the past few weeks has been, in terms of covid transmission risk, overall a lower risk than your activity over the past few weeks based on the information you've volunteered.

Both of us are acting legally, but for some reason you seem to have decided that my perfectly legal behaviour is not to your liking, and turn your nose down at me as being anti-social.

Yet you seem more than happy to make the most of your similarly perfectly legal behaviour of going to the opera and ballet.

I trust you used hand sanitiser? If they asked for mask wearing, I suspect they also asked you to sanitise your hands - it's just that you don't seem to have mentioned hand sanitiser even once at least on this thread. Are you not equally outraged by those who disregard premises' requests that you sanitise your hands? Some weeks I seem to be the only one stopping to use the hand sanitiser in the supermarket, everyone else just walks straight past.

Did you clean any surfaces before you touched them? Did you need to push any doors with your hands? Didn't touch your face or face mask at all while there? Touch any surfaces in the toilets (taps, stall doors, etc) or handrails around the theatres, or steady yourself by placing your hand on the backs of the seats in front as you made your way to your seat? etc.

If you're not already aware, there are evidenced cases of transmission(**) from people using seats in such venues a couple of hours after the infected person had already vacated the seats and left the premises. So it's unlikely masks would have been particularly effective in those cases.

I suspect, the reality is that your overall behaviour over the past few weeks is probably slightly risker than mine in terms of covid transmission.

Yet you seem to have decided that my perfectly legal behaviour - that one element of choosing not to wear a face mask in a fairly empty, very big, supermarket for just approx 30 minutes once per week - is anti-social.

But your perfectly legal behaviour, I presume you think is absolutely fine and beyond reproach? :?:

Both of us took a perfectly legal, calculated risk, exercising our personal freedom to choose for ourselves. You now look down on me for my choice of risk. You don't even seem to realise that you've just done the same - by choosing to go to the opera and ballet, when you could equally have chosen to avoid that risk and not gone. Why not buy a DVD and watch it at home? Why do you need to actually take the risk of the social setting of the theatre? Surely being social is itself the new anti-social?

--

(**) And here's the evidence...

"Evidence no-one expected
Investigators resorted to going through the CCTV recordings made at the church that Sunday to search for clues. And they stumbled across something completely unexpected - the woman who'd attended the later service, after the Chinese couple had left, had sat in the seats they had used several hours earlier.
..
Somehow, despite having no symptoms and not feeling ill, the Chinese husband and wife had managed to spread the virus. Maybe they'd had it on their hands and touched the seats, maybe their breath carried the infection and it landed on a surface, it's not clear, but the implications were huge.

For Dr Lee, piecing everything together, there was only one possible explanation - that the virus was being passed by people who had it without even realising. ... " https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52840763


And to those who think their own regular PPE (face masks) are good, something else from that article to think about... I rather suspect this nurse was probably using better face masks than any of the face mask mob are using, and I would expect they are professionally trained and experienced in how to use it properly

"Staff nurse Amelia Powell was shocked when she found out that she is asymptomatic. ... She had been feeling normal and safe behind the personal protective equipment she had to wear while caring for patients with Covid-19. But suddenly all those assumptions were undermined because, to her horror, she had tested positive."

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10366
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3599 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Some perspective

#450183

Postby Arborbridge » October 14th, 2021, 6:56 pm

onthemove wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:And as for anti-social types refusing to wear masks on some sort of misguided principle?


I can't help feel there's a bit of irony here.

I'm certainly vocally against mandatory mask wearing requirements and don't wear one in the supermarket, and so I guess that means I must be an "anti-social" type in your view. :(

But here's the irony - choosing not to wear a mask is now legally permitted, just the same as choosing to go to the opera and such like.


A long post from you, and I haven't time to give it justice, but to clarify about the above... I was referring particularly when people are a) requested to wear a mask when visiting a venu b) when people are in close proximity for long periods of time.

I wear a mask in a supermarket, but I'm not too worried by those who don't for the reason you gave.
n the other hand, if a management makes it clear that they would rather you wore a mask while in their venue, and you don't, I'd say that's suspect behaviour - rude to both the host organisation and fellow guests. If you are not wearing a mask on a train journey, especially when it is crowded, and you don't wear a mask, I consider that anti-social. If you talking loudly, guffawring, coughing or sneezing without a mask in the same situation, likewise. That's anti-social behaviour.

Incidentally, there are many things which we consider bad behaviour in life which we do not try to justify by "science". Bad manners are bad manners: we do not need a scientist to tell us that.
Arb.

scotia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3561
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:43 pm
Has thanked: 2371 times
Been thanked: 1943 times

Re: Some perspective

#450190

Postby scotia » October 14th, 2021, 8:00 pm

Lootman wrote:My one sin is that I will wear a mask only over my mouth if otherwise my glasses steam up.

Use a nose clip specifically designed for face masks - Amazon has many different types.

scotia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3561
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:43 pm
Has thanked: 2371 times
Been thanked: 1943 times

Re: Some perspective

#450193

Postby scotia » October 14th, 2021, 8:10 pm

onthemove wrote:I'm certainly vocally against mandatory mask wearing requirements and don't wear one in the supermarket


In Scotland masks are still required by law in most public indoor settings - which includes supermarkets.

onthemove
Lemon Slice
Posts: 540
Joined: June 24th, 2017, 4:03 pm
Has thanked: 722 times
Been thanked: 471 times

Re: Some perspective

#450198

Postby onthemove » October 14th, 2021, 8:22 pm

scotia wrote:
onthemove wrote:I'm certainly vocally against mandatory mask wearing requirements and don't wear one in the supermarket


In Scotland masks are still required by law in most public indoor settings - which includes supermarkets.


I'm not in Scotland.

gryffron
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3605
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am
Has thanked: 550 times
Been thanked: 1583 times

Re: Some perspective

#450229

Postby gryffron » October 14th, 2021, 10:50 pm

U962 wrote:Indeed do we know of any other vax in the history of vax's that put people in bed ill as a side effect - again no.

Yes. Yellow fever. It laid me out for a day. Extreme reactions quite common apparently. The place I had mine only offered them last thing Friday, to give you the weekend to recover. Of course, the disease itself is much worse.

Well you asked.

Gryff

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Some perspective

#450347

Postby XFool » October 15th, 2021, 1:18 pm

gryffron wrote:
U962 wrote:Indeed do we know of any other vax in the history of vax's that put people in bed ill as a side effect - again no.

Yes. Yellow fever. It laid me out for a day. Extreme reactions quite common apparently. The place I had mine only offered them last thing Friday, to give you the weekend to recover. Of course, the disease itself is much worse.

Well you asked.

Generally, isn't it likely to depend on both the vaccine and the vaccinated? I can't remember ever being put "in bed ill" as a side effect of any vaccination, including three COVID vaccines (AstraZeneca and Pfizer).

U962's comments are, IMO, nonsensical. They sound much like someone with a bee in his bonnet and with some kind of political agenda.

ElectronicFur
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 170
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:18 pm
Has thanked: 133 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: Some perspective

#450909

Postby ElectronicFur » October 18th, 2021, 12:25 am

Arborbridge wrote:... the evils of the program to vaccinate children.
...
Whether there is any logic to the anti-vax argument, I haven't seen any yet


Then you seem quite blinkered.

The logic is quite simple. The risk of Covid-19 to children is minimal, which means that exposing them to the known and unknown vaccine risks is completely unethical. Anyone who claims to know the risks is lying as they cannot possibly know the medium and long-term vaccine risks these children will face. Also due the fear-mongering and coercion that children are experiencing to take the vaccine, there is no possibility of them giving informed consent, only coerced consent, and again this is highly unethical.

Medical ethics seem to have been abandoned in 2020...

BhotiPila
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 124
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 7:15 am
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: Some perspective

#450916

Postby BhotiPila » October 18th, 2021, 7:08 am

gryffron wrote:
U962 wrote:Indeed do we know of any other vax in the history of vax's that put people in bed ill as a side effect - again no.

Yes. Yellow fever. It laid me out for a day. Extreme reactions quite common apparently. The place I had mine only offered them last thing Friday, to give you the weekend to recover. Of course, the disease itself is much worse.

Well you asked.

Gryff


You've probably had a 'weakened' oral polio vaccine, probably on a sugar lump as a child, I've had it a few times, so have my children and I have no regrets. The polio vaccine has been responsible for the near eradication of a terrible disease; it is a wonderful thing (also supported by Bill Gates so could have a microchip in it :lol:). 'Vaccine derived polio virus' is less well known. DYOR.
"Wild poliovirus (WPV) is the most commonly known form of the poliovirus. However, there is another form of polio that can spread within communities: circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus, or cVDPV. While cVDPVs are rare, they have been increasing in recent years due to low immunization rates within communities. cVDPV type 2 (cVDPV2) are the most prevalent, with 959 cases occurring globally in 2020. Notably, since the African Region was declared to have interrupted transmission of the wild poliovirus in August 2020, cVDPV are now the only form of the poliovirus that affects the African Region. Note that the 959 cases quoted above is probably wrong, for example, the cVDPV is detected in E.African sewage sampling but the sources are not identifiable.
https://polioeradication.org/polio-toda ... o-viruses/
An injectable inactivated polio vaccine is also available that does not give rise to the cVDPV.
I think that most of the COVID vaccines will be safer than the inactivated polio vaccines as most of the COVID vaccines do not contain inactivated virus particles. Current evidence suggests that any risks of the COVID vaccines are much less than the risks of contracting the disease.

BP

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10366
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3599 times
Been thanked: 5227 times

Re: Some perspective

#450920

Postby Arborbridge » October 18th, 2021, 7:25 am

ElectronicFur wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:... the evils of the program to vaccinate children.
...
Whether there is any logic to the anti-vax argument, I haven't seen any yet


Then you seem quite blinkered.

The logic is quite simple. The risk of Covid-19 to children is minimal, which means that exposing them to the known and unknown vaccine risks is completely unethical. Anyone who claims to know the risks is lying as they cannot possibly know the medium and long-term vaccine risks these children will face. Also due the fear-mongering and coercion that children are experiencing to take the vaccine, there is no possibility of them giving informed consent, only coerced consent, and again this is highly unethical.

Medical ethics seem to have been abandoned in 2020...


Anyone who claims to know the risks is lying as they cannot possibly know the medium and long-term covid risks these children will face.

I doubt we knew the long term risks of measles or polio jabs either, in the beginning.


I can't help feeling the "logic" of your argument would have been used by ant-vaxers for the whole population from the year dot. Governments have to keep the whole population safe or improve community health generally, and there are epochs when this requires action which a few may consider against personal liberties.
I'm sure there are many examples (smoking ban perhaps?) that people would bring up.

My grandchildren were very anxious to have the jab, but there's no sign of it happening (or course, one could argue they've all been "brainwashed") and then the whole family, bar one, caught covid - the vector being those school children.

Arb.

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Some perspective

#450945

Postby XFool » October 18th, 2021, 10:09 am

Arborbridge wrote:Why, I wonder, do some oddballs opposed covid vaccine, but presumably not other injections, many of which was have in childhood and throughout our lives.


More, possibly related to this whole peculiar business:

The dark side of wellness: the overlap between spiritual thinking and far-right conspiracies

The Guardian

Extreme right-wing views and the wellness community are not an obvious pairing, but ‘conspirituality’ is increasingly pervasive. How did it all become so toxic?


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests