FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Mask - IF the virus mutated and became way more deadly would more people start wearing masks
Mask - IF the virus mutated and became way more deadly would more people start wearing masks
Jump to: Newest in thread
KJ | |||
 | |||
"I wouldn't go outside at all if it was 90% deadly "Exactly. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be?" Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt " It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people." I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. | |||
| |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. " To be honest it doesn't make that much of a difference because I have been abused for wearing a Langyard Because unfortunately a lot of people have decided what they think somebody who is exempt looks like. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ?" Ebola. | |||
| |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. To be honest it doesn't make that much of a difference because I have been abused for wearing a Langyard Because unfortunately a lot of people have decided what they think somebody who is exempt looks like. " Sorry to hear that Lorna, unfortunately there are some ignorant people out there. | |||
"Yes the forum needs a bit of heated debate. We need to shake up this lovefest." Isn’t that in the Lounge  | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. " The lanyard thing was ok before the pandemic (yes, it existed then) but now you can buy them on eBay, so anyone can buy one. That unfortunately renders them fairly pointless. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. The lanyard thing was ok before the pandemic (yes, it existed then) but now you can buy them on eBay, so anyone can buy one. That unfortunately renders them fairly pointless." Well that does make it all foolish, would be better if issued by the medical service based on your records. To be honest I’ve only seen two in the last 10 months | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. The lanyard thing was ok before the pandemic (yes, it existed then) but now you can buy them on eBay, so anyone can buy one. That unfortunately renders them fairly pointless." Exactly and I feel that now even after the pandemic the Lang yard system is always going to be seen as people just trying it on. I've Ward mine since may 2019. On the flip side nobody really knew what it was back then where as there is more awareness now and have to say the majority of people are very helpful and compassionate. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola." Actually the last outbreak was 54 per cent thou it did differ in different countries ,some like Sierra Levine 41 per cent others like Liberia 55 per cent | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Actually the last outbreak was 54 per cent thou it did differ in different countries ,some like Sierra Levine 41 per cent others like Liberia 55 per cent " Agreed however the outbreak in Congo between 2002 and 2003 killed 90% of those infected. To be honest even if it is only 41% that is exceptionally deadly. | |||
" There was an interesting and heated debate in the office the over day. So I thought I'd add it here to get people's thoughts, opinions and viewpoints. Masks - IF the virus mutated and it became far more deadly say 90% so 9 out of every 10 people infected die. However this change hasn't effected the speeds of transmission as it still takes many weeks to kill. At the same time science has now confirmed that wearing a mask can reduced your chance of catching the new super deadly strain by at least 50%. Also they confirm wearing a mask also (like now) greatly protects other people from you passing the virus on. Do you think that more people would wear masks than currently? (Especially those who really shouldn't be exempt) Would some people who decide not to because it doesn't protect them atm the moment suddenly start wearing them when they realize its now them at very serious risk of dying? Do you think some people who have went down the medically exempt route currently would change their mind in the face of such a high risk to their own life? Answers on a postcard
KJ"It’s a new strain. Not a new super deadly strain. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Actually the last outbreak was 54 per cent thou it did differ in different countries ,some like Sierra Levine 41 per cent others like Liberia 55 per cent Agreed however the outbreak in Congo between 2002 and 2003 killed 90% of those infected. To be honest even if it is only 41% that is exceptionally deadly." Yes it was and that was a virus to be scared off | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Actually the last outbreak was 54 per cent thou it did differ in different countries ,some like Sierra Levine 41 per cent others like Liberia 55 per cent Agreed however the outbreak in Congo between 2002 and 2003 killed 90% of those infected. To be honest even if it is only 41% that is exceptionally deadly. Yes it was and that was a virus to be scared off " I agree it's an absolutely terrifying disease. And one that you can get re infected from without coming into contact with anybody infectious that nursed did, i can't remember her name. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ?" It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E | |||
| |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E" yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie " Er, I thought you just had to understand the premise of the post..... E | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be?" Sorry if I wasn't clear I was referring to all those who claim to be exempt when they have no medical reason to be so and are just using it as a reason to not wear a mask. A number of my work colleagues sadly fall into this category. It in no way refers to anyone with a genuine medical reason to be exempt. Those cheating the system claiming to be exempt only make it harder for those who have genuine reasons. KJ | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Sorry if I wasn't clear I was referring to all those who claim to be exempt when they have no medical reason to be so and are just using it as a reason to not wear a mask. A number of my work colleagues sadly fall into this category. It in no way refers to anyone with a genuine medical reason to be exempt. Those cheating the system claiming to be exempt only make it harder for those who have genuine reasons. KJ" There are about 30 genuine reasons not to wear | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. The lanyard thing was ok before the pandemic (yes, it existed then) but now you can buy them on eBay, so anyone can buy one. That unfortunately renders them fairly pointless. Well that does make it all foolish, would be better if issued by the medical service based on your records. To be honest I’ve only seen two in the last 10 months " One of the covid denying mask haters (very vocal about it) was buzzing when he picked up a lanyard off ebay I think. I agree they should have been issued by doctors / medical staff only. It would have certainly gave them more weight. Many councils put exemption cards on their websites for customers to print off at home if I recall as well. KJ | |||
| |||
"I wouldn't go outside at all if it was 90% deadly "Same here  | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Sorry if I wasn't clear I was referring to all those who claim to be exempt when they have no medical reason to be so and are just using it as a reason to not wear a mask. A number of my work colleagues sadly fall into this category. It in no way refers to anyone with a genuine medical reason to be exempt. Those cheating the system claiming to be exempt only make it harder for those who have genuine reasons. KJ There are about 30 genuine reasons not to wear " I never said there wasn't. I haven't personally a problem with people not wearing a mask for genuine reasons at all. The only point I do have a problem is when someone without a mask gets to close to me especially in supermarkets where its sometimes not easy to get out of there way quickly depending on where in the 1 way system you are and also the volume of people in the store (which seems way more these days). KJ | |||
" There was an interesting and heated debate in the office the over day. So I thought I'd add it here to get people's thoughts, opinions and viewpoints. Masks - IF the virus mutated and it became far more deadly say 90% so 9 out of every 10 people infected die. However this change hasn't effected the speeds of transmission as it still takes many weeks to kill. At the same time science has now confirmed that wearing a mask can reduced your chance of catching the new super deadly strain by at least 50%. Also they confirm wearing a mask also (like now) greatly protects other people from you passing the virus on. Do you think that more people would wear masks than currently? (Especially those who really shouldn't be exempt) Would some people who decide not to because it doesn't protect them atm the moment suddenly start wearing them when they realize its now them at very serious risk of dying? Do you think some people who have went down the medically exempt route currently would change their mind in the face of such a high risk to their own life? Answers on a postcard
KJ"I don't believe there is a "new deadly strain". I think we are being fed lies and, more lies. Plus, lockdown does not work. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie Er, I thought you just had to understand the premise of the post..... E" Sadly there will always be those that like to pull apart something hypothetical rather than focus on the premise. To appease those let's say the new variant now has 10% change of dying that's well within the realms of possibility. KJ | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie Er, I thought you just had to understand the premise of the post..... E Sadly there will always be those that like to pull apart something hypothetical rather than focus on the premise. To appease those let's say the new variant now has 10% change of dying that's well within the realms of possibility. KJ " Scare mongering | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie Er, I thought you just had to understand the premise of the post..... E Sadly there will always be those that like to pull apart something hypothetical rather than focus on the premise. To appease those let's say the new variant now has 10% change of dying that's well within the realms of possibility. KJ Scare mongering " Do you understand the word hypothetical? Also the concept of a hypothetical discussion to explore how changing variables can impact choice and behaviour? Only on this forum  | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie Er, I thought you just had to understand the premise of the post..... E Sadly there will always be those that like to pull apart something hypothetical rather than focus on the premise. To appease those let's say the new variant now has 10% change of dying that's well within the realms of possibility. KJ " If that happened there would be shear panic judging by how so many are so scared of the reality of how it is now | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? It's a hypothetical question. Guessing you missed that bit. E yes but you have to make it sound real otherwise it’s just a Horror movie Er, I thought you just had to understand the premise of the post..... E Sadly there will always be those that like to pull apart something hypothetical rather than focus on the premise. To appease those let's say the new variant now has 10% change of dying that's well within the realms of possibility. KJ Scare mongering Do you understand the word hypothetical? Also the concept of a hypothetical discussion to explore how changing variables can impact choice and behaviour? Only on this forum "It's the people who aren't worried about it, or deny it's existence that are the most worrying. But to the premise, I think those who currently wear a mask would continue to do so. The deniers who won't wear one for whatever cobblers will continue not wearing one. If they can't comprehend/believe and continue to deny the current situation, there's little to suggest a worse situation will change there minds. Unfortunately silly games win silly prizes. E | |||
" There was an interesting and heated debate in the office the over day. So I thought I'd add it here to get people's thoughts, opinions and viewpoints. Masks - IF the virus mutated and it became far more deadly say 90% so 9 out of every 10 people infected die. However this change hasn't effected the speeds of transmission as it still takes many weeks to kill. At the same time science has now confirmed that wearing a mask can reduced your chance of catching the new super deadly strain by at least 50%. Also they confirm wearing a mask also (like now) greatly protects other people from you passing the virus on. Do you think that more people would wear masks than currently? (Especially those who really shouldn't be exempt) Would some people who decide not to because it doesn't protect them atm the moment suddenly start wearing them when they realize its now them at very serious risk of dying? Do you think some people who have went down the medically exempt route currently would change their mind in the face of such a high risk to their own life? Answers on a postcard
KJ
It’s a new strain. Not a new super deadly strain. "Honestly people really don't read do they! I conceed defeat hypothetical discussion isn't possible on the fab virus forum lol | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? " I checked it and it seems that ebola did, it also has a much higher mortality rate than the black plague ever did, upwards of 90%, so yes so it seems to be one too. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? I checked it and it seems that ebola did, it also has a much higher mortality rate than the black plague ever did, upwards of 90%, so yes so it seems to be one too." we had that discussion few threads back | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? I checked it and it seems that ebola did, it also has a much higher mortality rate than the black plague ever did, upwards of 90%, so yes so it seems to be one too. we had that discussion few threads back " I see, that is good, it is an interesting comparison too | |||
| |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. " yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ??" So what's your solution then? | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ??" Really ?!? So what would your solution be to stop them getting abused unnecessarily ? | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? I checked it and it seems that ebola did, it also has a much higher mortality rate than the black plague ever did, upwards of 90%, so yes so it seems to be one too." Which thankfully now has vaccines to help combat it | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then?" The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. " | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? Really ?!? So what would your solution be to stop them getting abused unnecessarily ? Sarcasm has missed you there i am affraid ,jews wore yellow stars an a number tatoo on there arm ,an look where they ended up " | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then? The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person." That would work if people actually wore the lanyard, an easily recognisable symbol of exemption, unfortunately the majority of those not wearing masks aren’t wearing the lanyard. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? Really ?!? So what would your solution be to stop them getting abused unnecessarily ? Sarcasm has missed you there i am affraid ,jews wore yellow stars an a number tatoo on there arm ,an look where they ended up " No the sarcasm wasn’t lost me at all, it’s very obvious you are trying to turn this into more and that “solution” is not a comparison at all. So as asked before what would your solution be ? | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then? The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person. That would work if people actually wore the lanyard, an easily recognisable symbol of exemption, unfortunately the majority of those not wearing masks aren’t wearing the lanyard. " I think it's reasonable that people should not have to be further stigmatised, such as by wearing a lanyard, which is far the convenience of others. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then? The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person. That would work if people actually wore the lanyard, an easily recognisable symbol of exemption, unfortunately the majority of those not wearing masks aren’t wearing the lanyard. " Then I would assume that they are not exempt but I still wouldn't challenge them I would just keep my distance. There is a valid reason why some people won't where a Langyard and that is because they feel that it's singles them out as a target. I have said several times that a lot of people that are exempt are exceptionally vulnerable so wouldn't necessarily want to wear something that would make them feel more so if that makes any sense. I'm not its right but its not black and white. | |||
| |||
"90% death rate and no mask would saved you, you would need a bio suit. If you catch this virus and if you have underlying conditions, then 0.05% might die let's get a grip and stop pandering to the media headlines. " | |||
"Mind your own business stop worrying about other people . society is allready divided and covid rules are making it worse . People may have a real reason not to wear a mask an its only there an there doctors business " This is very true but unfortunately some shops have now said they will not let anybody in unless they are wearing a mask visor and will not allow any exemptions. They don't actually mean that though because they wouldn't stop child or baby coming in with a parent without one on as that's seen as acceptable but an adult with learning disabilities or severe mental health issues are not considered in this situation. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then? The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person. That would work if people actually wore the lanyard, an easily recognisable symbol of exemption, unfortunately the majority of those not wearing masks aren’t wearing the lanyard. Then I would assume that they are not exempt but I still wouldn't challenge them I would just keep my distance. There is a valid reason why some people won't where a Langyard and that is because they feel that it's singles them out as a target. I have said several times that a lot of people that are exempt are exceptionally vulnerable so wouldn't necessarily want to wear something that would make them feel more so if that makes any sense. I'm not its right but its not black and white." Fully aware it’s not black & white, however if people don’t wear the lanyard then they leave themselves open to be questioned upon entry to a store. | |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then? The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person. That would work if people actually wore the lanyard, an easily recognisable symbol of exemption, unfortunately the majority of those not wearing masks aren’t wearing the lanyard. Then I would assume that they are not exempt but I still wouldn't challenge them I would just keep my distance. There is a valid reason why some people won't where a Langyard and that is because they feel that it's singles them out as a target. I have said several times that a lot of people that are exempt are exceptionally vulnerable so wouldn't necessarily want to wear something that would make them feel more so if that makes any sense. I'm not its right but its not black and white. Fully aware it’s not black & white, however if people don’t wear the lanyard then they leave themselves open to be questioned upon entry to a store. " Actually it's not store staff that question people because they know that they could well be putting someone in a difficult situation . Its members of the public that feel the need to interfere. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Also can you please tell me the people that are currently exempt that you feel shouldn't be? Take a breath...... unfortunately there are many that do flout the rules, which spoils it for those truly exempt It more than spoils it, It causes serious issues. The list of exemptions is very small, You will always get people that flout the rules but seeing as those that are exempt from wearing a face covering are usually the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society they really don't need this extra pressure from people. I agree they don’t, which is why I agree with the lanyard system, easily recognisable and no questions asked. yes great idea we could force them to wear a yellow star all the time an tatoo a number on them even treat them like animals ,good one ?? So what's your solution then? The solution is the people need to just assume anybody wearing a Lang yard is exempt. As I said above you will always get people that just buy one off eBay, But because the people that are exempt are usually very vulnerable it's best to not challenge anybody and assume that person is a vulnerable person. That would work if people actually wore the lanyard, an easily recognisable symbol of exemption, unfortunately the majority of those not wearing masks aren’t wearing the lanyard. Then I would assume that they are not exempt but I still wouldn't challenge them I would just keep my distance. There is a valid reason why some people won't where a Langyard and that is because they feel that it's singles them out as a target. I have said several times that a lot of people that are exempt are exceptionally vulnerable so wouldn't necessarily want to wear something that would make them feel more so if that makes any sense. I'm not its right but its not black and white. Fully aware it’s not black & white, however if people don’t wear the lanyard then they leave themselves open to be questioned upon entry to a store. Actually it's not store staff that question people because they know that they could well be putting someone in a difficult situation . Its members of the public that feel the need to interfere." Here it is the shops staff, it’s a quick question and they either flash the lanyard, show an exemption card or walk away. | |||
"The thing that puzzles me is those that are exempt from wearing a mask are because of health issues right!?! But doesn’t that make them more vulnerable to Covid whilst out and about with no mask? To answer with my opinion the original question is no I don’t think people would wear masks regardless of the strain. I can’t quite understand the mentality behind mostly men sitting on the tube and train with no mask or wearing it round their chins with a dumb ass look on their faces suggesting how they’ve just beat the system." This is where people get confused. Being Vulnerable and being clinically vulnerable to the virus are 2 totally separate things. A lot of people wrongly assume that the exemption is for people with breathing conditions but actually unless they are told otherwise by a medical professional it is safe for them to wear one. It's people with mental health conditions, Autism And learning difficulties That really struggle. If you look at the official list of exemptions it actually says You are exempt from wearing a face covering if You cannot physically put one on, wear one or take it off. Or if wearing one, Taking it off or putting it on causes severe distress. | |||
"And its against the law to ask disability act 2010 section 112 if you ask you are discriminating ! You can be personaly fined £5000 and the business £9000 " I'm not sure the DDA Act applies to people walking into Tescos for their shopping.
E | |||
"And its against the law to ask disability act 2010 section 112 if you ask you are discriminating ! You can be personaly fined £5000 and the business £9000 I'm not sure the DDA Act applies to people walking into Tescos for their shopping.
E"Of course it does because they offer goods and services. Maybe have a look at the act. | |||
"The thing that puzzles me is those that are exempt from wearing a mask are because of health issues right!?! But doesn’t that make them more vulnerable to Covid whilst out and about with no mask? To answer with my opinion the original question is no I don’t think people would wear masks regardless of the strain. I can’t quite understand the mentality behind mostly men sitting on the tube and train with no mask or wearing it round their chins with a dumb ass look on their faces suggesting how they’ve just beat the system. This is where people get confused. Being Vulnerable and being clinically vulnerable to the virus are 2 totally separate things. A lot of people wrongly assume that the exemption is for people with breathing conditions but actually unless they are told otherwise by a medical professional it is safe for them to wear one. It's people with mental health conditions, Autism And learning difficulties That really struggle. If you look at the official list of exemptions it actually says You are exempt from wearing a face covering if You cannot physically put one on, wear one or take it off. Or if wearing one, Taking it off or putting it on causes severe distress." Ah yes quite right...there’s a whole host of reasons why some would be out without masks. Shocking how naive we can be and I mean myself predominantly to the bigger picture until corrected. | |||
| |||
"The thing that puzzles me is those that are exempt from wearing a mask are because of health issues right!?! But doesn’t that make them more vulnerable to Covid whilst out and about with no mask? To answer with my opinion the original question is no I don’t think people would wear masks regardless of the strain. I can’t quite understand the mentality behind mostly men sitting on the tube and train with no mask or wearing it round their chins with a dumb ass look on their faces suggesting how they’ve just beat the system. This is where people get confused. Being Vulnerable and being clinically vulnerable to the virus are 2 totally separate things. A lot of people wrongly assume that the exemption is for people with breathing conditions but actually unless they are told otherwise by a medical professional it is safe for them to wear one. It's people with mental health conditions, Autism And learning difficulties That really struggle. If you look at the official list of exemptions it actually says You are exempt from wearing a face covering if You cannot physically put one on, wear one or take it off. Or if wearing one, Taking it off or putting it on causes severe distress. Ah yes quite right...there’s a whole host of reasons why some would be out without masks. Shocking how naive we can be and I mean myself predominantly to the bigger picture until corrected." And this is exactly why I always say the same thing because you are now the 7th person that has said the same thing Either on the forums or privatly in a message. I do understand that someone not wearing a mask can make people feel uncomfortable however because of the reasons some people don't wear one are very complex that's why it's best just to treat everybody with compassion and understanding. | |||
| |||
| |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. " Another comparison not needed, most of those who are exempt are very unlikely to be riding motorbikes ! | |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. " There is a huge difference because you can choose not to ride a motorcycle. You cannot choose not to go to work, To do food shopping, To go to a medical appointment so it's hardly a comparison. | |||
"The thing that puzzles me is those that are exempt from wearing a mask are because of health issues right!?! But doesn’t that make them more vulnerable to Covid whilst out and about with no mask? To answer with my opinion the original question is no I don’t think people would wear masks regardless of the strain. I can’t quite understand the mentality behind mostly men sitting on the tube and train with no mask or wearing it round their chins with a dumb ass look on their faces suggesting how they’ve just beat the system. This is where people get confused. Being Vulnerable and being clinically vulnerable to the virus are 2 totally separate things. A lot of people wrongly assume that the exemption is for people with breathing conditions but actually unless they are told otherwise by a medical professional it is safe for them to wear one. It's people with mental health conditions, Autism And learning difficulties That really struggle. If you look at the official list of exemptions it actually says You are exempt from wearing a face covering if You cannot physically put one on, wear one or take it off. Or if wearing one, Taking it off or putting it on causes severe distress. Ah yes quite right...there’s a whole host of reasons why some would be out without masks. Shocking how naive we can be and I mean myself predominantly to the bigger picture until corrected. And this is exactly why I always say the same thing because you are now the 7th person that has said the same thing Either on the forums or privatly in a message. I do understand that someone not wearing a mask can make people feel uncomfortable however because of the reasons some people don't wear one are very complex that's why it's best just to treat everybody with compassion and understanding. " Yes I do try to be understanding and if I’m honest I’d say more mind my own business and keep myself safe and ultimately those around me. | |||
| |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. " Please read the thread especially the last few posts. You are wrong with your assumptions! | |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. Please read the thread especially the last few posts. You are wrong with your assumptions!" Err, I asked a question? | |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. Please read the thread especially the last few posts. You are wrong with your assumptions!" I'm sure if there were no exemptions people would suck it up or stay at home. If masks make such a big difference the they need to be worn. | |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. Please read the thread especially the last few posts. You are wrong with your assumptions! Err, I asked a question? " And I answered it by telling you if you had read the thread wouldn't needed to ask question. | |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. Please read the thread especially the last few posts. You are wrong with your assumptions! I'm sure if there were no exemptions people would suck it up or stay at home. If masks make such a big difference the they need to be worn." why do you think there are exemptions? Its because they are necessary. | |||
| |||
"Can lead a horse to water " Exactly, im giving up know. | |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. " Masks aren't designed to protect the wearer. They're designed to protect people surrounding the wearer. So actually, in terms of impact on the disabled/exempt person, your argument holds no water. It's a bit like vaccine herd immunity - if the majority of people in an enclosed public place (such as a shop), wear a mask, then the risk of anyone being exposed to particles of Covid is reduced. In practice, so few people are wearing the masks effectively that I genuinely believe mask wearing is having a very limited impact. My background is in lab science - wearing a mask under your chin, constantly touching it to adjust, having your nose hanging out or a big bushy beard stopping a seal forming all render it a reasonably fruitless exercise in all honesty. If worn properly, with proper donning, actual single use of single use masks etc, then there'd more than likely be a positive impact. I went to M&S earlier and the number of masks being worn/used effectively was low. One guy in the queue was wearing a disposable mask that was, originally, blue (I think). However it was streaked with visible dirt and clearly had been used over and over and it was vile. | |||
"Can lead a horse to water Exactly, im giving up know. "Good effort tho | |||
"If all these folk are so poorly they can't wear a mask or visor, should they not be at home in the vulnerable bracket? I'm sure help is available to the disabled. Please read the thread especially the last few posts. You are wrong with your assumptions! Err, I asked a question? And I answered it by telling you if you had read the thread wouldn't needed to ask question." Thx, I'm clear about that now? | |||
" Masks aren't designed to protect the wearer. They're designed to protect people surrounding the wearer. " Here ultimately is the crux of the problem. People are been continually conditioned to see anyone not wearing a mask as a direct danger to their personal safety and health. That's the context behind some people's opinions. I.E If your not wearing a mask then your a threat to my health and subsequently my family. It's an emotionally charged, defensive stand point that leads to very little tolerance of anybody not willing or able to wear a mask to protect other people regardless of the reasons as to why they won't or can't. KJ | |||
| |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. " That's hardly the same. I love how people make totally unconnected comparisons to justify a position. E | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola." Marburg, similar virus to ebola | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Marburg, similar virus to ebola" Whilst Marburg virus has an incredibly high fatality rate, it's also exceptionally rare. Fewer than 500 cases have been reported in humans since the virus was identified in 1967. | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Marburg, similar virus to ebola" Iv never heard of that. Has there been outbreaks of that then? | |||
| |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Marburg, similar virus to ebola Iv never heard of that. Has there been outbreaks of that then?" It's a virus from the same family as Ebola virus, but has only been recorded in about 500 people, ever. It's got an exceptionally high case fatality rate though - 100% in some of the small outbreaks. It's a virus found in monkeys that first infected humans in 1967 due to monkeys imported into Germany for the development of polio vaccines. Hence the name Marburg, after the German city where lab staff became infected after needlestick accidents. | |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. That's hardly the same. I love how people make totally unconnected comparisons to justify a position. E" My point was that they don't make any allowance for people unable to wear a crash helmet and nobody is suing the government over disability discrimination. | |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. That's hardly the same. I love how people make totally unconnected comparisons to justify a position. E My point was that they don't make any allowance for people unable to wear a crash helmet and nobody is suing the government over disability discrimination. " it is not even comparable is it! And actually if you would like to have a look there are some exemptions to wearing a crash helmet.  | |||
| |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. That's hardly the same. I love how people make totally unconnected comparisons to justify a position. E My point was that they don't make any allowance for people unable to wear a crash helmet and nobody is suing the government over disability discrimination. " Nope, sorry. You didn't have a point. And you've even less of one now. E | |||
"So what about refusing to wear a crash helmet on a motorbike because of claustrophobia, see how far that gets you. That's hardly the same. I love how people make totally unconnected comparisons to justify a position. E My point was that they don't make any allowance for people unable to wear a crash helmet and nobody is suing the government over disability discrimination. " Yes they do- a Sikh man wearing a turban is exempt from the requirement to wear a crash helmet on a mootorcyle or a safety helmet at work. | |||
"90% death rate and no mask would saved you, you would need a bio suit. If you catch this virus and if you have underlying conditions, then 0.05% might die let's get a grip and stop pandering to the media headlines. " 0.05% is 1 in 2000. There are 66.65m people in the UK. 66,650,000 /2,000 = 33,325 That means that if every person in the UK had caught covid 19 then we'd have seen 33,325 deaths if the death rate was 0.05%. We have had 68k deaths with only 10-20% having had the virus. The fact that you are judging the severity of covid purely on a death rate (that I have just proved to be inaccurate) shows your ignorance. At 35k cases in the UK each day now the NHS is approaching limits in some areas of the country. If the NHS can't cope then more people who could have survived will die. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Realistically, the people who are currently anti-mask won't "believe" the facts anyway unless there are literally bodies littering the streets." I'm afraid you might be right. Doubtless when they see the footage on the TV they'll claim the dead are all actors.
E | |||
| |||
"Cases dont = deaths ,the pcr test is flawed as we test at 45 ct anyrhing over 34 ct is meaningless ,you a finding something is not there and you are not disclosing vorus loading . This results in false positives ,even the person who designed the pcr said it should Not be used to detect viruses" The inventor of PCR made the following statement in the early 1990s, specifically about HIV (that's a long time ago in the world of molecular biology): "Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Science for inventing the PCR, is thoroughly convinced that HIV is not the cause of "AIDS". With regard to the viral load tests, which attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: "Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron." PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves." What this means is that so long as you identify a genetic sequence that is unique to a virus, PCR can be used to amplify that specific sequence in a sample and then a separate test (electrophoresis) can be used to compare the sequence in the sample to the known viral sequence. If the sequences match, then that viral sequence is present in the sample. Seeing as the viral genetic sequence would only be present if a person is infected with the virus, this can be considered a positive test. At the time Mullis was writing, PCR was not sensitive enough or sophisticated enough to give a quantitative answer. That's to say, it could only be used to say yay or nay that a sample contained a certain genetic sequence (from HIV, in the case of the statement above). It could not, in the mid 1990s, be used to distinguish between high, medium and low viral loads. In the context of Covid, it doesn't matter whether a person has a high, medium or low viral load. We're just bothered whether they do or do not have it (yes/no). In the context of HIV, viral load quantification can inform treatment and can establish the progress of the disease. Nowadays, there are better methods to quantify someone's level of HIV infection (namely measure their CD4+ T-cell levels). This was not available in the 1990s. Kary Mullis died in 2019, before the Covid pandemic was, well, a pandemic. He has not made one solitary statement about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor how PCR should or should not be used. | |||
"Cases dont = deaths ,the pcr test is flawed as we test at 45 ct anyrhing over 34 ct is meaningless ,you a finding something is not there and you are not disclosing vorus loading . This results in false positives ,even the person who designed the pcr said it should Not be used to detect viruses The inventor of PCR made the following statement in the early 1990s, specifically about HIV (that's a long time ago in the world of molecular biology): "Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Science for inventing the PCR, is thoroughly convinced that HIV is not the cause of "AIDS". With regard to the viral load tests, which attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: "Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron." PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves." What this means is that so long as you identify a genetic sequence that is unique to a virus, PCR can be used to amplify that specific sequence in a sample and then a separate test (electrophoresis) can be used to compare the sequence in the sample to the known viral sequence. If the sequences match, then that viral sequence is present in the sample. Seeing as the viral genetic sequence would only be present if a person is infected with the virus, this can be considered a positive test. At the time Mullis was writing, PCR was not sensitive enough or sophisticated enough to give a quantitative answer. That's to say, it could only be used to say yay or nay that a sample contained a certain genetic sequence (from HIV, in the case of the statement above). It could not, in the mid 1990s, be used to distinguish between high, medium and low viral loads. In the context of Covid, it doesn't matter whether a person has a high, medium or low viral load. We're just bothered whether they do or do not have it (yes/no). In the context of HIV, viral load quantification can inform treatment and can establish the progress of the disease. Nowadays, there are better methods to quantify someone's level of HIV infection (namely measure their CD4+ T-cell levels). This was not available in the 1990s. Kary Mullis died in 2019, before the Covid pandemic was, well, a pandemic. He has not made one solitary statement about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor how PCR should or should not be used." Preach. | |||
"Cases dont = deaths ,the pcr test is flawed as we test at 45 ct anyrhing over 34 ct is meaningless ,you a finding something is not there and you are not disclosing vorus loading . This results in false positives ,even the person who designed the pcr said it should Not be used to detect viruses The inventor of PCR made the following statement in the early 1990s, specifically about HIV (that's a long time ago in the world of molecular biology): "Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Science for inventing the PCR, is thoroughly convinced that HIV is not the cause of "AIDS". With regard to the viral load tests, which attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: "Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron." PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves." What this means is that so long as you identify a genetic sequence that is unique to a virus, PCR can be used to amplify that specific sequence in a sample and then a separate test (electrophoresis) can be used to compare the sequence in the sample to the known viral sequence. If the sequences match, then that viral sequence is present in the sample. Seeing as the viral genetic sequence would only be present if a person is infected with the virus, this can be considered a positive test. At the time Mullis was writing, PCR was not sensitive enough or sophisticated enough to give a quantitative answer. That's to say, it could only be used to say yay or nay that a sample contained a certain genetic sequence (from HIV, in the case of the statement above). It could not, in the mid 1990s, be used to distinguish between high, medium and low viral loads. In the context of Covid, it doesn't matter whether a person has a high, medium or low viral load. We're just bothered whether they do or do not have it (yes/no). In the context of HIV, viral load quantification can inform treatment and can establish the progress of the disease. Nowadays, there are better methods to quantify someone's level of HIV infection (namely measure their CD4+ T-cell levels). This was not available in the 1990s. Kary Mullis died in 2019, before the Covid pandemic was, well, a pandemic. He has not made one solitary statement about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor how PCR should or should not be used." I wish there was a "Boom" or "Burn" emoji......
E | |||
| |||
| |||
"All very well ,but we are testing at 45ct thats almost 2500 copies . How do you explain when people have sent 20 samples from the same person an got 10 back positive an 10 back negative an yet its accurate ??? " 20 samples from the same person? Not sure what circumstances one person would take 20 tests. I'd be interested in links to this please. If people are self swabbing are they doing it properly? Also, interesting that you've moved the goalposts. E | |||
"All very well ,but we are testing at 45ct thats almost 2500 copies . How do you explain when people have sent 20 samples from the same person an got 10 back positive an 10 back negative an yet its accurate ??? " Yes, I can. Shit swabbing technique giving potential false negatives. Not swabbing deep enough, not getting enough cell sample on the swab, repeatedly swabbing the same area (which will result in there being no loose cell debris to get on the swab after one or two efforts). You should not swab the same area multiple times in short succession. If people put as much effort into following the guidelines rather than devoting their time to try and circumvent things/"prove" the pandemic isn't real, we'd be a lot further on. | |||
"All very well ,but we are testing at 45ct thats almost 2500 copies . How do you explain when people have sent 20 samples from the same person an got 10 back positive an 10 back negative an yet its accurate ??? Yes, I can. Shit swabbing technique giving potential false negatives. Not swabbing deep enough, not getting enough cell sample on the swab, repeatedly swabbing the same area (which will result in there being no loose cell debris to get on the swab after one or two efforts). You should not swab the same area multiple times in short succession. If people put as much effort into following the guidelines rather than devoting their time to try and circumvent things/"prove" the pandemic isn't real, we'd be a lot further on." People have been watching too much CSI and think anyone can do a swab. E | |||
| |||
"Yes the same person ,it was a news item over a month ago ,a haulage company was testing its long haul drivers as they drove in europe ,the owner of the company got tired of testing staff ,so tested herself 20 times in the same day . I didnt move goalposts i am making the point that the test is unreliable and efecting the numbers .if we want to actually get control of this should we not have acurate data ??" The data is as accurate as it can be. If you actually understood the science, you'd get that. Do you not think that the whole scientific community would be up in arms if Governments across the world were using a test that produced inaccurate results?! Reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) is being used the world over. Everyone is using it. Why hasn't a single virologist, microbiologist etc in all the 195 countries of the world made a statement deriding RT-PCR as a diagnostic tool? | |||
" Yes, I can. Shit swabbing technique giving potential false negatives. Not swabbing deep enough, not getting enough cell sample on the swab, repeatedly swabbing the same area (which will result in there being no loose cell debris to get on the swab after one or two efforts). You should not swab the same area multiple times in short succession. If people put as much effort into following the guidelines rather than devoting their time to try and circumvent things/"prove" the pandemic isn't real, we'd be a lot further on." | |||
| |||
"There are doctors speaking out all over the world ,slome have been sacked as a result of it " Go on, amuse me. Send some links to them. I need a good laugh. | |||
"There are doctors speaking out all over the world ,slome have been sacked as a result of it " Pass me the phone, I need to call bullcrap. Prove me wrong, post up one link to one doctor, anywhere in the world who's been sacked over this. E | |||
"There are doctors speaking out all over the world ,slome have been sacked as a result of it " Having the title 'doctor' doesn't mean they have any virology expertise and certainly doesn't mean they are exempt from the stupidity of conspiracy theories. | |||
"Yes the same person ,it was a news item over a month ago ,a haulage company was testing its long haul drivers as they drove in europe ,the owner of the company got tired of testing staff ,so tested herself 20 times in the same day . I didnt move goalposts i am making the point that the test is unreliable and efecting the numbers .if we want to actually get control of this should we not have acurate data ??" Did you not understand the Kinkys' explanation above? E | |||
| |||
"This is from who site regarding the pcr test www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users" It is. Well observed. Now, what do you understand by the contents of this web page? | |||
| |||
"Here is fauci saying that its unreliable. Www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&feature=youtu.be" I'm not interested in Dr Fauci, who certainly has not said using PCR to identify positive samples is unreliable. What do YOU understand by the WHO link you shared? What does it actually mean? | |||
"Here is fauci saying that its unreliable. Www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&feature=youtu.be" Except he isn't saying that. He's said "there's no right or wrong answer, we don't know". | |||
"Here is fauci saying that its unreliable. Www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&feature=youtu.be Except he isn't saying that. He's said "there's no right or wrong answer, we don't know"." You. Could. Not. Make. It. Up. Except......you know. *points ^^^
E | |||
"Here is fauci saying that its unreliable. Www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&feature=youtu.be" I'm also interested in your answer to the question. You brought the WHO link to the table as "evidence", you must have some idea what it means. E | |||
| |||
"Out and about in Paris today and I didn't see a single person in a shop without a mask on and being properly worn. The bigger shops have security on the door and without a mask you are not coming in, simple as that. " Everywhere I go in my locality people are wearing masks, using hand sanitizers as they enter the Big stores or on public transport.  | |||
"What virus ever has killed anywhere near that ? Ebola. Marburg, similar virus to ebola Iv never heard of that. Has there been outbreaks of that then?" It was quoted in the book ebola. I read a good few years ago. Very similar to Ebola, only got its name as it was found in Germany. | |||
| |||
| |||
"If you think you're smart not wearing a mask which has been scientifically proven to reduce the spread and you don't need to be a scientist to see that, just someone who understands how a breathable shower curtain works, then sorry but your credibility in anything rational may be put into question in a court of law or here on fab. "As I stated further up in the thread I wear a mask and to be honest was a germaphobe before Covid. I was saying in my locality in the North East nearly everyone wears masks in Super Markets, shopping centres and on public transport. I would say its 90% or more complying for the greater good. | |||
"And its against the law to ask disability act 2010 section 112 if you ask you are discriminating ! You can be personaly fined £5000 and the business £9000 " Is it really against the law to ask? Could you cite a reference with the legal quote to that effect please. | |||
| |||
"And its against the law to ask disability act 2010 section 112 if you ask you are discriminating ! You can be personaly fined £5000 and the business £9000 Is it really against the law to ask? Could you cite a reference with the legal quote to that effect please." What does the Equality Act say? The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination. The Facebook posts incorrectly cite sections 112 and 119 of the Act as evidence that you will be fined if you challenge people who do not wear a face covering and mis-state the law in several ways. Neither of these sections is about what counts as discrimination, or about face coverings. Section 112 sets out circumstances when it can be unlawful for someone to knowingly help another person discriminate (for example, it can determine if an employer is legally responsible for an act of discrimination carried out by their employee). Section 119 is about what remedies are available for people who have brought a successful civil claim for discrimination in a county court. In particular, it makes clear that damages for discrimination can include damages for injury to feelings. The Equality Act makes service-providers (e.g. shops and restaurants) liable in civil claims for acts of disability discrimination against members of the public. For example, a blind person with a guide dog who has been unjustifiably barred from a shop can claim damages against the shop, including for injury to feelings. However, a request by the owner of a business (like a shop or restaurant) to a disabled person to wear a mask is very unlikely to result in a successful civil claim for disability discrimination, as long as the business owner has followed the government guidance set out above and not singled out the disabled person for less favourable treatment than other non-disabled customers. It’s also important to note that the Equality Act does not make it a criminal offence to discriminate against someone, so a request for a customer to wear a mask would not give rise to criminal liability. In fact, as the official Equality and Human Rights Commission explains, claims of discrimination under the Equality Act are dealt with by bringing a civil claim, not by going to the police or criminal courts. “Criminal liability” relates to criminal offences. If someone is thought to have breached criminal law they are prosecuted by the state and often tried by a jury. If they are found guilty (which must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt), they are sentenced to a criminal penalty like a prison sentence or a fine. “Civil liability” relates to disagreements between organisations or individuals, such as one private individual suing another private individual (or a business etc), usually for damages. Cases are considered on the balance of probabilities. In the vast majority of cases, the Equality Act does not create criminal offences but just civil rights of action. Family disputes, personal injury claims, breaches of contract and employment law are areas of civil law. References in the social media posts to a criminal offence are a misinterpretation of subsection 3 of section 112 of the Equality Act. That subsection says it is a criminal offence to “knowingly or recklessly” make a “false or misleading statement” about there being no breaches of the Equality Act in particular circumstances. This is largely to prevent employers and service providers from avoiding liability for the discriminatory acts of their employees. | |||
| |||
"Here is fauci saying that its unreliable. Www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&feature=youtu.be I'm not interested in Dr Fauci, who certainly has not said using PCR to identify positive samples is unreliable. What do YOU understand by the WHO link you shared? What does it actually mean?" Have we had an answer yet, I'm going grey waiting. E | |||
"Here is fauci saying that its unreliable. Www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&feature=youtu.be I'm not interested in Dr Fauci, who certainly has not said using PCR to identify positive samples is unreliable. What do YOU understand by the WHO link you shared? What does it actually mean? Have we had an answer yet, I'm going grey waiting. E" We've not. Don't hold your breath, E. You'll go blue | |||
"And its against the law to ask disability act 2010 section 112 if you ask you are discriminating ! You can be personaly fined £5000 and the business £9000 " And this ladies and gentlemen is a classic example of how to make yourself look daft by posting random bullshit posts from Facebook | |||
" Many councils put exemption cards on their websites for customers to print off at home if I recall as well. KJ " You can (or at least used to) download one off the dot Gov website. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"If your on a plane and the oxygen masks drop do you refuse to wear the mask on medical grounds? Visors don’t block your nose and mouth... yes they might not be AS effective as traditional mask (and look stupid) but surely better than nothing for exempt people ? Also a mask can prevent you spreading droplets to others... which is the point right? As well as you getting droplets spread to you and can stop you touching your face. Putting on and wearing a mask (properly and not on your chin) can switch on your anti covid brain... Lanyards and medical rights people... really? No excuses... change the law and stop the loopholes mask or visor required in confined spaces. " | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I haven't worn a mask ever so shouldn't I be dead? I work in the public sector and have done all the way through jetted of on my hols and not 1 sniffle so in my eyes they don't do jack, but also you should actually go and check your stats on the masks because even the most industrial hardcore masks won't stop it I'm afraid and just for the record I saw a video today we're a kiwi fruit tested positive for convid so you decide! Take care " Ohhhhhhhhh, I've not heard the kiwi fruit one for a while. One of the funnier ones  | |||
| |||
"Above taken from Fullfact.org, article entitled "Challenging someone for not wearing a face mask isn’t against the Equality Act"" So as I said I didn't think it was discrimination to ask them. | |||
"I haven't worn a mask ever so shouldn't I be dead? I work in the public sector and have done all the way through jetted of on my hols and not 1 sniffle so in my eyes they don't do jack, but also you should actually go and check your stats on the masks because even the most industrial hardcore masks won't stop it I'm afraid and just for the record I saw a video today we're a kiwi fruit tested positive for convid so you decide! Take care " Sounds like they are working very well then as they are supposed to protect other people lol Maybe you should be thanking the majority that do wear them for keeping you sniffle free  | |||
