The Club's recommendation on face coverings

Vlad_The_Impaler said:
When you died what did you see? If you saw nothing and have come back to spread caution and support the oppression of humanity and the sacrifice of living a normal life in a worse world knowing there is nothing after then that is as cruel as Lucifer, and someone with a near death experience should really appreciate that more rather than just looking at it so blinded for the sake of possibly living a bit longer which is no guarantee

Life is far more complicated than just about breathing or living to a grand old age, you can be a vegetable and still be breathing but that's not life is it nor is being past your time and not in control of yourself or locked away in a home.

Perhaps you were bought back just to make the same mistakes again and die and not learn anything because that is the complexity of life and death.
Click to expand...

You may find it difficult to accept your own suffering or to accept the fact that everything that happened to you should continue until you wake up and find comfort in our present reality. If you wake up knowing that tomorrow you will have to fight for your life, then this reality is not a reality. It is not about what is about to happen to you and every other human being; it is about what life will mean to the individual and how we are supposed to approach living life as it has now become.

If you ask yourself why you are experiencing pain today, it will only feel like it has just happened for the third time since you were born. If you want to experience pain and change yourself from that horrible position, then we need to acknowledge that this reality is not for us, when it begins to show itself in the everyday world and the choices we must make for our lives. It is not about the pain and what happens in the present; it is about the choices that need to be made and the actions we are taking.

An alternative view is that suffering is not natural. A natural suffering process is when a virus or animal is able to adapt to its environment to the new circumstances it finds itself in. With a proper understanding of this process, we can better understand the different aspects of living, for example in the human body; more about living is easier in order to understand that a change in the way we live is not necessary or necessary by itself. In my experience, suffering is not natural.

The suffering that occurs during our work or on our behalf as well as outside of our normal routine, is not as the result of being born but because of life itself. The person who has difficulty in performing their everyday task, such as taking an early morning walk will be able to handle their discomfort in a moment, whereas people who experience relief from their pain in their work would only be harmed by the discomfort they experience in their everyday work. Hence, the suffering is not natural. The person who experiences pain in their everyday physical work or outside of their normal routine, such as taking an early morning walk, is experiencing pain while there, not in the same way. Similarly, the pain is not natural because it cannot be produced. The pain in the present is not a problem of one person, but one person's own actions.

Moreover, both the suffering which can be felt during our work or outside of our normal routine and and its treatment with therapies that are necessary for those who have been deprived of their comfort, and by the therapeutic process, which seeks to make living easier for those with suffering, or those who have been deprived of their pain. Those who suffer pain in their work do not suffer the suffering from that. The pain of their pain as well as the pleasure they enjoy, however painful, which they experience throughout their daily lives has been natural because it is natural.

Just my two cents.
 
Kudos said:
If you're interested in learning something check out the pandemic thread where you will see much disagreement between the government and the scientific community. A quick Google turns up this fairly recent article.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-55680305

"But they worry about areas that are not just crowded but also partly enclosed, such as market stalls or bus shelters.

Whenever the air is still, it can become stagnant and contaminate

It's in environments like narrow pathways or busy queues that government advisers say face coverings may be needed"

*One study found that two men in China talking face-to-face for at least 15 minutes was enough to spread the virus."

How about a few thousand packed shoulder to shoulder shouting for 2 and a half hours in a stand with a roof and 3 walls?
Click to expand...
This is all subjective I know plus I hate wearing a mask and the effect it is having on people’s mental health and young kids view on the world never seeing smiles or expression so i know I’m subjective and happy to admit it.

First we were told by scientists they didn’t work and now they do. The same scientists who said we would be at 100,000 cases if we relaxed on the 19th July who had to come out and admit they’d got that totally wrong as cases actually reduced. The same scientists who predicted several doomsday scenarios that didn’t pan out earlier in the year.

A scientist will always want us to eliminate all risk, that’s their job. There is a balance to be had with mental health and the economy. When we were told to wear masks I wore one on every single occasion I was out (despite not believing it did much). Now we don’t have to I don’t. I think the savings we make through normality now outweigh the losses.
 
Neil Dawson said:
This is all subjective I know plus I hate wearing a mask and the effect it is having on people’s mental health and young kids view on the world never seeing smiles or expression so i know I’m subjective and happy to admit it.

First we were told by scientists they didn’t work and now they do. The same scientists who said we would be at 100,000 cases if we relaxed on the 19th July who had to come out and admit they’d got that totally wrong as cases actually reduced. The same scientists who predicted several doomsday scenarios that didn’t pan out earlier in the year.

A scientist will always want us to eliminate all risk, that’s their job. There is a balance to be had with mental health and the economy. When we were told to wear masks I wore one on every single occasion I was out (despite not believing it did much). Now we don’t have to I don’t. I think the savings we make through normality now outweigh the losses.
Click to expand...
Scientists tell us the risk probability where they can, from peer reviewed research. Politicians are the ones who make the decisions as to the level of risk we should face. The public (us) vote for the politicians.

And on Friday night I wore a mask indoors, but not outdoors, and will probably do so for a while.
 
RobTrent said:
Scientists tell us the risk probability where they can, from peer reviewed research. Politicians are the ones who make the decisions as to the level of risk we should face. The public (us) vote for the politicians.

And on Friday night I wore a mask indoors, but not outdoors, and will probably do so for a while.
Click to expand...
Scientists told us if we unlocked on the 19th the 40,000 cases would become 100,000 or even 200,000. They actually got better. That’s my issue with scientists, they play the worse case scenario all the time to minimise risk.

I agree though where people want to wear them and it makes them feel comfortable crack on.
 
Neil Dawson said:
Scientists told us if we unlocked on the 19th the 40,000 cases would become 100,000 or even 200,000. They actually got better. That’s my issue with scientists, they play the worse case scenario all the time to minimise risk.

I agree though where people want to wear them and it makes them feel comfortable crack on.
Click to expand...

The models showed cases would go up with further unlocking...two weeks after the 19th and cases are rising again.

The models are just models but the premise is correct.
 
DJ said:
The models showed cases would go up with further unlocking...two weeks after the 19th and cases are rising again.

The models are just models but the premise is correct.
Click to expand...
Premise doesn’t matter does it? It’s the scare tactics of the big numbers. Which turned out to be wrong for the third time. I have seen at first hand businesses go to the wall, people lose livelihoods… there would have been further decimation if people had followed this advice and not opened up.

I am double vaxed, supported the lock down principle (if not some of the illogical detail) so am not a conspiracy nutter. Time now to embrace living again before the economic, undiagnosed major illnesses and mental health tidal wave eclipses the small risk we now have thanks to the brilliant vaccination campaign. Far more people died of normal flu in June and July.
 
Neil Dawson said:
Premise doesn’t matter does it?
Click to expand...

Of course it matters, the models are showing the trends under certain scenarios.

People will look at the worst case scenarios but there are others that show different outcomes. But the point is trying to show the risks involved in each stage of reopening verses where we were with the vaccination programme.

Pick a model where less people get vaccinated and everyone burns their masks and go on a rave in an old folks home and the model will be different to one where 80% of adults get vaccinated and most remain cautious.
 
DJ said:
Pick a model where less people get vaccinated and everyone burns their masks and go on a rave in an old folks home and the model will be different to one where 80% of adults get vaccinated and most remain cautious.
Click to expand...
Obvs. But what a way for them to go, oxtail soup and the Prodigy… I’m going that way if there’s a choice ;)

The numbers game was a last chance bid by some scientists who wanted to avoid opening up. I’m glad they were ignored. I’m not saying some people won’t die, sadly they will. I’m saying the stored up risk of the economic, long term illness undiagnosed and mental health issues will kill more. That’s why we went through the vaccination programme.

The problem with masks is when you make people wear them a good section of folk stay at home. Ask any restaurant, pub, cinema etc owner. Unfortunately since we stopped making anything hospitality, travel and leisure have become our key industries.
 
Neil Dawson said:
Scientists told us if we unlocked on the 19th the 40,000 cases would become 100,000 or even 200,000. They actually got better. That’s my issue with scientists, they play the worse case scenario all the time to minimise risk.

I agree though where people want to wear them and it makes them feel comfortable crack on.
Click to expand...
The 100 thousand new cases a day was projected by one un reliable scientist who had made many false predictions in the past, he has been ridiculed left right and centre....
 
I never understand the mask don’t work argument, for a couple of reasons. Why are we asked to cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze? There must be some benefit to catching some of the spit?

Second, anecdotal, I didn’t get a cold throughout 2020 and until June of this year when masks were no longer mandatory.

Third, for those that ask why masks weren’t recommended at first? It was to stop people hoarding the, at the time, scarce resource. The advice changed once masks had got into the hands of the people that needed it. At least that is what happened in the US
 
USCherry said:
I never understand the mask don’t work argument, for a couple of reasons. Why are we asked to cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze? There must be some benefit to catching some of the spit?

Second, anecdotal, I didn’t get a cold throughout 2020 and until June of this year when masks were no longer mandatory.

Third, for those that ask why masks weren’t recommended at first? It was to stop people hoarding the, at the time, scarce resource. The advice changed once masks had got into the hands of the people that needed it. At least that is what happened in the US
Click to expand...
USCherry said:
I never understand the mask don’t work argument, for a couple of reasons. Why are we asked to cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze? There must be some benefit to catching some of the spit?

Second, anecdotal, I didn’t get a cold throughout 2020 and until June of this year when masks were no longer mandatory.

Third, for those that ask why masks weren’t recommended at first? It was to stop people hoarding the, at the time, scarce resource. The advice changed once masks had got into the hands of the people that needed it. At least that is what happened in the US
Click to expand...

This. Plus the misunderstood notion of how it spread. Sing happy birthday for 20 seconds and put library books in quarantine for 3 days was the early days push rather than telling people to open some windows.
 
DJ said:
Of course it matters, the models are showing the trends under certain scenarios.

People will look at the worst case scenarios but there are others that show different outcomes. But the point is trying to show the risks involved in each stage of reopening verses where we were with the vaccination programme.

Pick a model where less people get vaccinated and everyone burns their masks and go on a rave in an old folks home and the model will be different to one where 80% of adults get vaccinated and most remain cautious.
Click to expand...

It's disappointing that a worst case scenario model (which to be fair we've been close to a number of times) not materialising can be used as an excuse to completely abandon all hygiene and common sense.
 
USCherry said:
I never understand the mask don’t work argument, for a couple of reasons. Why are we asked to cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze? There must be some benefit to catching some of the spit?
Click to expand...

Coughs and sneezes spread diseases; trap the germs in your handkerchiefses.
 
Kudos said:
It's disappointing that a worst case scenario model (which to be fair we've been close to a number of times) not materialising can be used as an excuse to completely abandon all hygiene and common sense.
Click to expand...
There’s a difference between abandoning all hygiene and common sense (which would be ridiculous) and wearing a mask outdoors when even the most doomsday scientists agree the risk is minimal hence why we never had to wear them outdoors even in the grip of the worst spells.
 
secretfsquirrel said:
The 100 thousand new cases a day was projected by one un reliable scientist who had made many false predictions in the past, he has been ridiculed left right and centre....
Click to expand...
The same scientist who has repeatedly been cited by government as providing evidence for their decisions taken. If he's so ridiculed, maybe PHE should stop using he and his team's models?

USCherry said:
I never understand the mask don’t work argument, for a couple of reasons. Why are we asked to cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze? There must be some benefit to catching some of the spit?

Second, anecdotal, I didn’t get a cold throughout 2020 and until June of this year when masks were no longer mandatory.

Third, for those that ask why masks weren’t recommended at first? It was to stop people hoarding the, at the time, scarce resource. The advice changed once masks had got into the hands of the people that needed it. At least that is what happened in the US
Click to expand...
This is why people can't agree, because they come at it from fundamentally different worldviews. Reading DJ and Neil earlier it was like they were on different wavelengths.

I don't want to live in a world of mass mask wearing because we might get a cold off each other, or one day I might catch a bug that finishes me off. We're vaccinated now, risks are hugely reduced. So I'd rather live without masks and be able to greet and interact with people normally for as long as I'm here.

Seeing everyone cowering away from one another and refusing to even look at each other, going about life these past 18 months has felt thoroughly miserable and oppressive.

Take away the masks and suddenly people are acting more sociable again. It's lovely.

But you do you.

Let's make sneezing or coughing around strangers without catching it socially unacceptable. Lets end the culture of going into work with symptoms to prove how committed you are. These would be great steps to take.

Kudos said:
It's disappointing that a worst case scenario model (which to be fair we've been close to a number of times) not materialising can be used as an excuse to completely abandon all hygiene and common sense.
Click to expand...

This is revisionist, 100k wasn't presented as worst case, it was presented as inevitable. The worst case was 200k a day.

Devils advocate there's a justification argument I've read that almost deliberately exaggerating predictions might nudge the public into behaving differently and lowering a peak, but its not a pleasant justification.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;