Lockdown’s Last Lingerings - (Covid since L2 ended)

[chris p bacon]

19 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

I spent some time in Japan in the summer of 2019. A lot of people were wearing masks and they do it for two reasons.

Firstly, it's a very respectful society and if you have a respiratory disease it protects others.

Secondly, if you meet lots of members of the public, then you wear a mask to protect yourself from what they might give you. Hence virtually all bus drivers and people serving in shops wear them to protect themselves. It's a great idea and somehow I think we will be doing it too in the future...

 

We lived in Japan in the mid 70's and mask wearing was very common then. To sneeze or cough in public was seen as possibly the most disrespectful thing to do.

 

I have often thought we would eventually have it here as cities became more crowded. 

[Reorte]

32 minutes ago, ikcdab said:

I spent some time in Japan in the summer of 2019. A lot of people were wearing masks and they do it for two reasons.

Firstly, it's a very respectful society and if you have a respiratory disease it protects others.

Secondly, if you meet lots of members of the public, then you wear a mask to protect yourself from what they might give you. Hence virtually all bus drivers and people serving in shops wear them to protect themselves. It's a great idea and somehow I think we will be doing it too in the future...

 

Still think it sounds somewhat dehumanising and isolating as well as well out of proportion to the level of risk in normal times. Not the sort of world I want to live in, not at all. We really shouldn't be viewing our fellow human beings as just a risk and / or a nuisance, something to avoid or protect ourselves from. It's only in specific circumstances, e.g. covid, or some parts of hospitals that I find the idea tolerable. Like I said earlier, all very dystopian. The (normal times) risk of serious illness via such means is miniscule and minor illness not serious enough to justify such a change to how we all view each other.

[Bernard Lamb]

5 hours ago, Reorte said:

 

Without a specific problem to deal with (e.g. what we have right now) I find the idea of masks forevermore a rather depressing idea, the sort of thing that would've once belonged to a dystopian vision of the future; under more normal circumstances the risk of spreading or catching something serious enough to justify such measures doesn't justify them. We shouldn't get used to the idea of routinely viewing our fellow human beings as things to be avoided and a threat to be contained; ever-decreasing ordinary human contact was something that was bothering me even pre-Covid. Justifiable during Covid but not something to be sought a moment longer than necessary IMO.

I suppose it all comes down to how public spirited you are. Although what can be depressing in helping to protect others is beyond me.

Having travelled widely I have always been willing to accept the local dress code and other local customs.

I remember a time when Hi Vis was not in general use. People now accept it without any fuss. 

I suppose in countries like Japan and Thailand a Buddhist tradition probably helps to generate a caring attitude.

The last time I arrived in Bangkok in pre covid times my friend handed me a mask as soon as I got in her car. I saw no reason not to wear it.

Bernard 

[Reorte]

35 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

I suppose it all comes down to how public spirited you are. Although what can be depressing in helping to protect others is beyond me.

Having travelled widely I have always been willing to accept the local dress code and other local customs.

I remember a time when Hi Vis was not in general use. People now accept it without any fuss. 

I suppose in countries like Japan and Thailand a Buddhist tradition probably helps to generate a caring attitude.

The last time I arrived in Bangkok in pre covid times my friend handed me a mask as soon as I got in her car. I saw no reason not to wear it.

 

When there's a sufficient risk to be concerned about, such as now, then I'd agree with you. I've given various reasons why I don't like the whole idea though. You may not agree with them - fair enough, we've all got different opinions, but they shouldn't be hard to understand even if you disagree.

 

Remember we're all those others to everyone else, and "I don't feel the need for that level of protection from others" is a perfectly valid position too. We don't go to either extreme - "don't give a damn about anyone else" is obviously an unacceptable extreme, but the other one of "do everything imaginable to protect the most concerned" isn't much better - where does a reasonable line lie? The "it's about protecting others" response though makes it rather hard to see a reasonable line, it's too easily used to justify anything and try to shut down all further discussion.

 

As for other countries, we're talking about what might become the norm here.

 

When it comes to "no reason not to", I usually come from "need a good reason to." Local customs can be a good reason to, but the "no reason not to" again makes it far too easy to push anything.

 

Do we want to be so fearful of others that such measures are the norm? IMO the risks of that greatly outweigh the (in normal circumstances) risks of catching a cold.

Edited February 23, 2021 by Reorte

[Nearholmer]

"When in Rome" is one thing, but importing Roman tradition is another.

 

Face-covering is deeply not a European tradition, and probably hasn't been "forever".  Apart from protective uses, and the odd 'ceremonial' use as in a bride's veil and the brief fashion for deep mourning in Victorian times, face-covering in European culture means "baddy concealing identity". It feels "depressing", because it is counter-cultural, because it it symbolic of a time of fear and sadness, and because it compromises a very important non-verbal communication channel - facial expression*.

 

In fact, I would say that covering the face other than for protective reasons is culturally abnormal globally, and across time, because communication by facial expression has been part of us since we were chimps. The few places in time and space where it has applied for other than protective reasons have almost all (all?) related to women in heavily partriarchal societies, I think.

 

So, the only way that face-covering will became a long-term norm here, IMO, is if we all become convinced (as the Japanese clearly are) of the necessity of it from a protective viewpoint, whether that be protecting oneself or protecting others. I for one hope that it doesn't prove to be a necessity, and, yes, I will feel faintly depressed if it does.

 

*Interesting that Eastern cultures, which, if it isn't an erroneous cultural stereotype, use facial expression far less, and other non-verbal cues more, find it easier to accept mask wearing.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Reorte]

I should probably add that I wouldn't mind seeing the end of "I'll come in to work and soldier on, it's just a cold."

 

Separately, we should also be aware of the potential risks of not giving our immune systems something to deal with every now and then.

[petethemole]

My stepson put this on his FB page

[Neil]

I'd like to make clear that my previous post here, which I guess some took exception to, was intended in the same vein as monkeysarefun's original which I quoted. Not as a point of politics but as one of competence. I'm glad that we're doing so well with vaccinating the population and I'm also glad that caution appears to be the priority as lockdown is eased. However I'm mightily cheesed off that we have a death toll of 120,000+ thanks largely to the choices made by government. While we're ahead of countries like New Zealand, Australia and Taiwan in our vaccination programme, their outcomes are still streets ahead of ours with far fewer deaths and fewer restrictions over the last year. It angers me that a good vaccination roll out is seen by some to render the earlier blunders forgivable.

 

While I'm in cheesed off mode I must also make mention of all the public money spaffed away on services and equipment of dubious value to the nation but lucrative to the chums of those who hold the reins of power. I refer to the substandard track and trace operation run by Dido Harding, the contract awarded to Matt Hancock's neighbour and their like. Again the politics are immaterial, competence and probity are what is being questioned.

 

On a more positive note there are interesting takes on the easing of lockdown in today's Guardian from Devi Shridar, Jennifer Dowd, Graham Medley and Stephen Reicher, who offer a more scientific view of the process than the stupidity evident in today's Daily Mail 'what are we waiting for' headline.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Neil
Grammar

[Nearholmer]

Interesting views, and personally I've long thought that what Prof Shridhar has advocated makes very solid sense. But, is Prof Dowd (not an epidemiologist) right when she says "Second, Covid-19 is spread primarily through aerosols ........." ? I thought that the evidence pointed to larger droplets being the primary mechanism of spread, with aerosols a secondary form of transmission. She also seems to make some assumptions about what schools weren't doing when last they were fully open, which are totally at odds with what was being done in the schools that our two attend.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Nearholmer

[monkeysarefun]

37 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Interesting views, and personally I've long thought that what Prof Shridhar has advocated makes very solid sense. But, is Prof Dowd (not an epidemiologist) right when she says "Second, Covid-19 is spread primarily through aerosols ........." ? I thought that the evidence pointed to larger droplets being the primary mechanism of spread, with aerosols a secondary form of transmission. She also seems to make some assumptions about what schools weren't doing when last they were fully open, which are totally at odds with what was being done in the schools that our two attend.

 

 

We had the case here in Melbourne last month  where a positive case with the UK strain  in a quarantine hotel used a nebuliser for asthma treatment in his room. This basically turned the virus into an aerosol mist which spread out into the corridor and its suspected into the air-conditioning  system,

As a result several workers who had no contact with the case, and several guests in other rooms, again with absolutely no contact with the positive case  contracted it.

 

In contrast, although the workers spent five or six days between  getting infected and  being tested positive going shopping, out to pubs, restaurants, the cricket, riding trams and trains  and so on  there was not a single case in the general community because of it and  Victoria is still at  zero local transmissions.

 

Similarly Perth and Brisbane saw UK strain cases occurring in hotel workers with no direct contact with positive guests, Suspicion is now turning to the air-conditioning systems maybe recycling  contaminated air that contains aerosols of the virus. Again, there were zero  subsequent cases of local transmission despite  the workers mingling in the  community while positive  for several days.  

 

I'm not sure if the above is an example of how aerosols do  spread it 'better' than close contact or larger droplets, but it is interesting,

 

 

[APOLLO]

9 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

We are British, so will sit in the rain enjoying a pint with our mates

 

Free refills if you like watered down beer !!!!

 

Brit15

[monkeysarefun]

10 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

Oh dear not that old chestnut again... Can't you give it a rest? As we've explained to you many times it's not just a question of who is in power, there are lots of other things that affect how well a country deals with a pandemic, you can have the best government in the world but if the people don't want to play ball it all goes out of the window, not to mention lots of other variables.

 

Please, please, please leave it at that, you've had your say, we've replied, I thought we'd agreed to differ...

You sure read a lot into that simple statement of gratitude that  I made. 

[APOLLO]

8 hours ago, Reorte said:

You don't need something to have something to hide to dislike being watched all the time, to find this distrusting, suspicious, "you're being watched, you're being recorded" world very unpleasant. I understand that some people aren't bothered by it but some of us are very much and find it deeply, deeply unpleasant.

 

Law breakers just cover themselves up anyway, apart from the really stupid ones (although there seems to be a plentiful supply of those).

 

Watch this - China, - very frightening - Their dystopia is current. Watch from 5min 35sec for the future - coming to the UK.

 

 

And NEVER forget both where this virus originated, and the recent WHO "investigation" over there.

 

Nuff said.

 

Brit15

[Andy Hayter]

3 hours ago, Reorte said:

 

 

 

Remember we're all those others to everyone else, and "I don't feel the need for that level of protection from others" is a perfectly valid position too. We don't go to either extreme - "don't give a damn about anyone else" is obviously an unacceptable extreme, but the other one of "do everything imaginable to protect the most concerned" isn't much better - where does a reasonable line lie? The "it's about protecting others" response though makes it rather hard to see a reasonable line, it's too easily used to justify anything and try to shut down all further discussion.

 

 

 

At the risk of shutting down further discussion I have to point out that:

""I don't feel the need for that level of protection from others" is a perfectly valid position" is not a valid position at all. The wearing of masks of the type that the general public wear has never been about protecting yourself.  It has always been about protecting others.  Many seem not to appreciate that.

 

The scientific  data is variable and will certainly depend on the test conditions and the mask type but the trends are clear.

Wearing a mask protects you the mask wearer by between 5 - 30% from infection.

But if you are infected you wearing a mask protects others by 70 - 95%.

So wearing a mask is all about protecting others nd I apologise if you feel that has shut the conversation down.

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Andy Hayter

[monkeysarefun]

I was going to mention the Urghars and the role face-matching technology is playing in their genocide but in the interests of keeping the thread OT I decided against it.

Edited February 23, 2021 by monkeysarefun

[Nearholmer]

20 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

Suspicion is now turning to the air-conditioning systems maybe recycling  contaminated air that contains aerosols of the virus.

 

It took several months before aerosols were accepted as a means of transmission, and one of the first proven cases involved a restaurant where the AC was picking-up the exhalations from someone, ducting it several metres, and depositing it on another group and the other end of the room.

 

So, perfectly feasible.

 

What I was questioning is whether it is the primary means of transmission, which I don't believe evidence suggests it is. 

[monkeysarefun]

Just now, Nearholmer said:

 

It took several months before aerosols were accepted as a means of transmission, and one of the first proven cases involved a restaurant where the AC was picking-up the exhalations from someone, ducting it several metres, and depositing it on another group and the other end of the room.

 

So, perfectly feasible.

 

What I was questioning is whether it is the primary means of transmission, which I don't believe evidence suggests it is. 

 

Here at least, it seems to currently be the only means!

[APOLLO]

China has the world by the short and curlies. Fall out seriously with them and it wont just be model trains they stop exporting to the west !!!!

 

Brit15

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, Reorte said:

I should probably add that I wouldn't mind seeing the end of "I'll come in to work and soldier on, it's just a cold."

 

Separately, we should also be aware of the potential risks of not giving our immune systems something to deal with every now and then.

The subtext being "and spread it around my colleagues". These "heroes" used to really pi55 me off in my pre-railway branch banking days because I knew I'd have to persuade one or more of our part-time cashiers to do extra hours the next week to cover the absences of those he (it would usually be a bloke) had infected.

 

John

[Nearholmer]

9 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

Here at least, it seems to currently be the only means!

 

Just wait until an Englishman coughs in a lift in Melbourne.

[john new]

1 minute ago, Dunsignalling said:

The subtext being "and spread it around my colleagues". These "heroes" used to really pi55 me off in my pre-railway branch banking days because I knew I'd have to persuade one or more of our part-time cashiers to do extra hours the next week to cover the absences of those he (it would usually be a bloke) had infected.

 

John

An attitude that was encouraged and driven by that nauseating advert a year or two back by one of the makers (or retailers) of symptom reducing remedies. You may stifle the symptoms but not the underlying bug.

[Reorte]

26 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

 

At the risk of shutting down further discussion I have to point out that:

""I don't feel the need for that level of protection from others" is a perfectly valid position" is not a valid position at all. The wearing of masks of the type that the general public wear has never been about protecting yourself.  It has always been about protecting others.  Many seem not to appreciate that.

 

I know some don't appreciate that but that's not quite my point. Each one of us are the others any measure is designed to protect. The problem with just the "protect others" line alone is that it makes it incredibly easy - far too easy - to simply dismiss any disagreement as selfish, no matter how remote the risk (note that I'm speaking generally there, not in relation to any specific current measures for the current situation). "Protecting others" without considering what all the "others" actually want. Isn't that something we usually reserve for children?

 

Whilst I'm not religious I do go by "Do unto others what you would have others do unto you," and I'd add the additional bit "if you were in their shoes" (e.g. with Covid by considering what I would expect if I was in a high risk group).  It's selfish to not consider whether your actions might harm someone, but it's also selfish to go too far telling others what their actions should be to stop harming you, "you" in this case being, well, from the perspective of every individual.

 

To take the extremes, if someone wants to run the risk of juggling hand grenades - that's up to them as far as I'm concerned, but it would be very wrong to put others at that risk. But at the other extreme it's also wrong to use "protecting others" to justify a measure against the very far-fetched. Sensible reality lies somewhere in between (and there's no provable, objective point as to where). So masks on buses right now - fair enough. But not forevermore.

Edited February 23, 2021 by Reorte

[monkeysarefun]

17 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

 

Just wait until an Englishman coughs in a lift in Melbourne.

No worries mate, we've had that sorted for yonks!

https://www.traveller.com.au/do-they-still-spray-disinfectant-in-planes-1mat2r

[Michael Hodgson]

10 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

As a spectacle wearer myself, I agree wholly about the misting problem, and as a retiree who doesn't need to, I can sympathise with anyone's discomfort in being required to wear one for hours on end.

 

I've got a hearing aid but I'm not really using it at present as I find I can't cope with expecting my lugs to support that, a face mask and a pair of steamed-up specs.

[John M Upton]

4 hours ago, Neil said:

While I'm in cheesed off mode I must also make mention of all the public money spaffed away on services and equipment of dubious value to the nation but lucrative to the chums of those who hold the reins of power. I refer to the substandard track and trace operation run by Dido Harding, the contract awarded to Matt Hancock's neighbour and their like. Again the politics are immaterial, competence and probity are what is being questioned.

 

This is what I want to see become the subject of an extensive independent public inquiry into the Governments' handling of this whole affair, that may well lead to criminal investigations for fraud and numerous other serious charges.  Ministers and maybe even Boris himself could find themselves in the dock in a couple of years time.

 

It is patently obvious that billions of pounds of taxpayers money has effectively disappeared and the curious thing is nobody is asking the necessary searching questions as to where the hell this money has gone.