The Club's recommendation on face coverings

northstandmark said:
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?


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.



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.
Click to expand...
“You do you” interesting take on my post. I am talking about the effectiveness of masks. At no point did I give my opinion on when/where/how/whether they should be worn. Just because people don’t want to wear masks, they simply can not argue in good faith that they don’t work, that’s what I am talking about.
 
northstandmark said:
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.
Click to expand...

We’re on different wavelengths due to our own personal bias, just like everyone else.

I’m not actually in favour of mask wearing in the stadium as it’s affects are marginal in that scenario. In the concourses? Now there’s a discussion.

What I was discussing was the general restrictions arguments. Neil has his stance based on the hospitality sector. I have mine based on wanting to keep kids in school. If restrictions on the former helps the latter due to lower community infection then that’s what I’ll back. If I had a foot in both camps I might feel differently, but as I don’t, that’s how my opinion is formed. Just like everyone else.
 
I wore one, except when I threw about 5 wine gums in my mouth for each of Brom's goals) It was getting chilly so actually helped keep me warm. Not sure how much it protected me or others but made me feel better.

I'm afraid I'm kind of resigned to getting Covid at some point despite being double vaccinated. Absolutely don't want it and worry about long Covid or passing it on to my vaccinated mum but just think with zero restrictons, it's almost inevitable. I could avoid matches but don't think that would stop me getting it now with the number of people not wearing them in supermarkets. Would be good I think if spectator numbers were limited but understand the financial problems that causes clubs. I would just gently encourage people to wear masks to prevent spread of Covid, colds, the lot. Colds are likely to be more severe now as we have lost natural immunity to them and if anyone gets a double Covid-Cold virus, that will be unpleasant and potentially put them at greater risk of post-viral fatigue. No hardship in wearing masks in colder weather, especially as it's not a hot August this year:)
 
DJ said:
We’re on different wavelengths due to our own personal bias, just like everyone else.

I’m not actually in favour of mask wearing in the stadium as it’s affects are marginal in that scenario. In the concourses? Now there’s a discussion.

What I was discussing was the general restrictions arguments. Neil has his stance based on the hospitality sector. I have mine based on wanting to keep kids in school. If restrictions on the former helps the latter due to lower community infection then that’s what I’ll back. If I had a foot in both camps I might feel differently, but as I don’t, that’s how my opinion is formed. Just like everyone else.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with you. We do all have our biases which affect our stance on things. I felt one way before I was made redundant last year and then got a job working from home and quickly noticed that I became less fearful of restrictions. All of this is very understandable when people's jobs/businesses are at risk. I guess the answer is a kind of compromise. Will having to wear masks really stop people going to matches or destroy the experience? I don't think so. Even if I don't see the point, if it helps make others less fearful, is it a great hardship? I don't think so. Likewise, if someone is completely anti full stadiums then they don't have to attend.
 
Flower power pacifist generation turned militant right wing kill ‘em all as long as they were not the ones doing the killing.
 
Gloria Hunter said:
Totally agree with you. We do all have our biases which affect our stance on things. I felt one way before I was made redundant last year and then got a job working from home and quickly noticed that I became less fearful of restrictions. All of this is very understandable when people's jobs/businesses are at risk. I guess the answer is a kind of compromise. Will having to wear masks really stop people going to matches or destroy the experience? I don't think so. Even if I don't see the point, if it helps make others less fearful, is it a great hardship? I don't think so. Likewise, if someone is completely anti full stadiums then they don't have to attend.
Click to expand...
Thought you said you were an English teacher
 
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...

For some reason they have gone up in the BCP area and we now have the 4th highest cases in England, 517.6 in 100,000 on latest figures.

People in this area who have had their first jab is 79.3%.
Second jab is 67.3%.

The UK average for first jabs is 88.9%.
Second jab is 74.5%.

Echo 6/8

THE Covid infection rate in Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole is now the fourth-highest of every local authority area in the country.

From left to right: name of local authority; rate of new cases in the seven days to August 1; number (in brackets) of new cases recorded in the seven days to August 1; rate of new cases in the seven days to July 25; number (in brackets) of new cases recorded in the seven days to July 25.

Lincoln, 756.3, (751), 357.5, (355)
Exeter, 575.3, (756), 371.4, (488)
Hull, 543.5, (1412), 490.0, (1273)
Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole, 517.5, (2046), 448.2, (1772)
 
Last edited:
northstandmark said:
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.
Click to expand...

By whom? Whitty only mentioned hospitalisation that were in a pattern of doing every three weeks and made a sensible caution that if it doubles a couple more times we would be in serious trouble.

I've seen "could hit 100,000 by end of August" which at 50,000 and rising isn't unreasonable with abolishing restrictions.

There was the sacked affair guy before Hancock was the sacked affair guy on TV quite a bit do you mean him?
 
Gloria Hunter said:
I wore one, except when I threw about 5 wine gums in my mouth for each of Brom's goals) It was getting chilly so actually helped keep me warm. Not sure how much it protected me or others but made me feel better.

I'm afraid I'm kind of resigned to getting Covid at some point despite being double vaccinated. Absolutely don't want it and worry about long Covid or passing it on to my vaccinated mum but just think with zero restrictons, it's almost inevitable. I could avoid matches but don't think that would stop me getting it now with the number of people not wearing them in supermarkets. Would be good I think if spectator numbers were limited but understand the financial problems that causes clubs. I would just gently encourage people to wear masks to prevent spread of Covid, colds, the lot. Colds are likely to be more severe now as we have lost natural immunity to them and if anyone gets a double Covid-Cold virus, that will be unpleasant and potentially put them at greater risk of post-viral fatigue. No hardship in wearing masks in colder weather, especially as it's not a hot August this year:)
Click to expand...
If colds are more severe because we have lost immunity. then we need to take the masks off and catch cold pretty quickly. Because, unless lockdown (either national level or personal level) is to last for ever, then sooner or later you will catch cold.

I saw the effect on the son of a friend of my parents, who was kept free from germs in early life. For five years, everything was washed clean. If he dropped a toy on the floor, it was washed before he could have it back. He was not allowed to be ill. So far so good. But then he went to school - occasionally. For his first year, he caught everything going, and it was serious because he had no natural immunity. His body could not cope.

If we manage to keep free from colds for long periods, then sooner or later we will catch one. And if we are in old- or middle-age and we don't have the defences, it will be serious. We need colds, because we need immunity.
 
dsr-burnley said:
If we manage to keep free from colds for long periods, then sooner or later we will catch one. And if we are in old- or middle-age and we don't have the defences, it will be serious. We need colds, because we need immunity.
Click to expand...

Exactly, this is why everyone who has spent time away from the bulk of humanity in a submarine, in space or an isolated research centre has since died from a cold.
 
RobTrent said:
Gotta laugh. Now mask wearing is the new big conspiracy.
Click to expand...
No conspiracy – just not many seem to know that the WHO were likely lobbied to change their mind. It all seems a bit fishy to me.
 
This is what happens when you televise a flu – we have lost our collective minds.
 
RobTrent said:
the WHO Elite I’m guessing.
Click to expand...
The WHO headed up by Tedros, infamous for his dodgy past whilst serving as the Health Minister in Ethiopia. He's about as trustworthy as Sepp.

Anyway, love and light to you all. Turn off your TVs and stop reading the newspapers. Go outside, exercise (if you can), take your vitamins and breath some fresh air.

UTC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;