You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Confusion.

2456729

Comments

  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,119
    HAYSIE said:

    emerging evidence

    I think this is the key take

  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    HAYSIE said:

    emerging evidence

    I think this is the key take

    The emerging evidence is the last bit, about the tiny particles hanging in the air.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492
    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    emerging evidence

    I think this is the key take

    The emerging evidence is the last bit, about the tiny particles hanging in the air.
    Therefore even more reason to wear a mask.
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,119
    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.

    You don't seem to be seeing it.

    This is Government advice.

    If you go back to the beginning.

    The Government is advising us that we have to wear a mask into a sandwich shop if we are buying a takeaway.

    They are advising us that if we intend to eat on the premises then its ok not to wear a mask.

    They are not saying that you put your life in danger, or it is risky, they are saying it is ok.

    It is blatantly obvious that if there are particles hanging in the air, that you may breathe them in if you are not wearing a mask, with or without social distancing.

    You would surely have to say that eating on the premises without a mask is much riskier than getting a takeaway from the same shop while wearing a mask.

    I could hazard a guess how 21 people on the same caravan site got infected, and it wouldn't be through getting a takeaway while wearing a mask.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.

    If you don't need to wear a mask in a sandwich shop, why do you have to wear one to get a takeaway?
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,119
    edited July 27
    HAYSIE said:

    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.

    You don't seem to be seeing it.

    This is Government advice.

    If you go back to the beginning.

    The Government is advising us that we have to wear a mask into a sandwich shop if we are buying a takeaway.

    They are advising us that if we intend to eat on the premises then its ok not to wear a mask.

    They are not saying that you put your life in danger, or it is risky, they are saying it is ok.

    It is blatantly obvious that if there are particles hanging in the air, that you may breathe them in if you are not wearing a mask, with or without social distancing.

    You would surely have to say that eating on the premises without a mask is much riskier than getting a takeaway from the same shop while wearing a mask.

    I could hazard a guess how 21 people on the same caravan site got infected, and it wouldn't be through getting a takeaway while wearing a mask.
    I get it. I said earlier. It's economy and keeping nhs alive and in turn cancer victims etc alive vs wearing a mask. They balance this by saying wear a mask as often as possible but we need to need to keep the economy going so eat your grub then stick your mask back on. They must think that letting people eat inside rather than banning it completely must have positive connotations for the economoy.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    HAYSIE said:

    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.

    You don't seem to be seeing it.

    This is Government advice.

    If you go back to the beginning.

    The Government is advising us that we have to wear a mask into a sandwich shop if we are buying a takeaway.

    They are advising us that if we intend to eat on the premises then its ok not to wear a mask.

    They are not saying that you put your life in danger, or it is risky, they are saying it is ok.

    It is blatantly obvious that if there are particles hanging in the air, that you may breathe them in if you are not wearing a mask, with or without social distancing.

    You would surely have to say that eating on the premises without a mask is much riskier than getting a takeaway from the same shop while wearing a mask.

    I could hazard a guess how 21 people on the same caravan site got infected, and it wouldn't be through getting a takeaway while wearing a mask.
    I get it. I said earlier. It's economy and keeping nhs alive and in turn cancer victims etc alive vs wearing a mask. They balance this by saying wear a mask as often as possible but we need to need to keep the economy going so eat your grub then stick your mask back on. They must think that letting people eat inside rather than banning it completely must have positive connotations for the economoy.
    Exactly, so they are not really following the science.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.

    Teaching unions call for face masks to be made mandatory for children in secondary schools when they finally return in September amid row over 'out of step guidance'


    The UK Government has conceded that face masks in the classroom were pointless. The rules has caused 'untold confusion', unions have claimed.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I think we just have to trust SAGE are doing the best with the info they've got. There are few precedents to this situation.

    Meanwhile, everyone on social media are now expert virologists and mask experts.

    New coronavirus cases hit record highs in more than a DOZEN US states as Dr Deborah Birx urges those regions with rising infections to close bars, cut back on indoor dining and to mandate face masks


    The number of coronavirus cases are now spiking in more than a dozen states, including Oklahoma, Missouri and Mississippi as the virus shows signs it is moving North.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,119
    I can't read the article because I refuse to give the daily mail any of my bandwidth.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I can't read the article because I refuse to give the daily mail any of my bandwidth.

    Just read the highlighted bits.

    New coronavirus cases hit record highs in more than a DOZEN US states as Dr Deborah Birx urges those regions with rising infections to close bars, cut back on indoor dining and to mandate face masks



    Teaching unions call for face masks to be made mandatory for children in secondary schools when they finally return in September amid row over 'out of step guidance'
    The UK Government has conceded that face masks in the classroom were pointless. The rules has caused 'untold confusion', unions have claimed.
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,119
    edited July 27
    Teaching unions will be told by teachers - 'we dont want to go back to school unless all kids wear masks.' The union expresses their concerns to the govt and the media. The govt are told by sage that it's pointless. I would side with govt and sage over any union most of the time because unions tend to just shove shove shove their agenda regardless of any bigger picture.

    That said, the only place I can find a link to a govt official stating that masks in schools are pointless is the daily mail. It might be fake news, it might not.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    Teaching unions will be told by teachers - 'we dont want to go back to school unless all kids wear masks.' The union expresses their concerns to the govt and the media. The govt are told by sage that it's pointless. I would side with govt and sage over any union most of the time because unions tend to just shove shove shove their agenda regardless of any bigger picture.

    That said, the only place I can find a link to a govt official stating that masks in schools are pointless is the daily mail. It might be fake news, it might not.

    The unions are describing Government guidance as out of step.

    I couldn't argue with that.

    In some USA States the advice is as follows,
    New coronavirus cases hit record highs in more than a DOZEN US states as Dr Deborah Birx urges those regions with rising infections to close bars, cut back on indoor dining and to mandate face masks

    So they are going backwards.

    Some regions of the UK are in the same boat.

    The evidence that it can be spread by the particles hanging in the air prove that social distancing is probably not as effective as we thought.

    Why would you not advise that masks should be worn in schools?
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,119
    I doubt the govt said it was pointless. That'd be to extreme. The mail have probably taken something out of context or just made it up.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I doubt the govt said it was pointless. That'd be to extreme. The mail have probably taken something out of context or just made it up.

    Will kids have to wear face masks when schools go back?
    No, children will not have to wear face masks when they go back to school.
    Official advice obtained from the government's website gov.uk says that wearing face masks in educational settings is not recommended.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11657308/kids-wear-facemasks-school-reopen/



    Holmes Chapel Comprehensive in Cheshire told parents that face coverings will be needed from the new term, The Sun reported.
    The drastic new plans were revealed in a newsletter sent home with kids.
    Parents were told: “When school reopens after summer, the wearing of face coverings will be compulsory for students and staff when inside the school buildings and in all classrooms.
    "We have taken this decision as a precautionary additional measure to our expected safe behaviours. On the balance of probability, the wearing of face masks is likely to make our school safer than if we don’t wear them."

    https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/kids-forced-wear-masks-school-22420668


    Coronavirus: France mandates masks for schools and transport

    France will make face masks compulsory on public transport and in secondary schools when it starts easing its coronavirus lockdown on 11 May, Prime Minister Edouard Philippe has said.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52459030


    Personal protective equipment (PPE) including face coverings and face masks
    Wearing a face covering or face mask in schools or other education settings is not recommended.


    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-implementing-protective-measures-in-education-and-childcare-settings/coronavirus-covid-19-implementing-protective-measures-in-education-and-childcare-settings
  • chillingchilling Member Posts: 1,927
    edited July 28
    Firstly, this virus is going to be around for a very long time, so folks will have to get to grips with that. Taking every piece of advice the government give out as science based will leave you confused. The science has to be adapted to different situations, theatres.
    Knowing it will be around for however long, then the key word to take away from the shot below is ‘ limiting ‘.
    ‘ The Economy Does Matter’.

    Queuing for a takeaway should involve distancing and a mask inside a premises, so then at least there’s the chance that maybe 50% ? , could be anything, will have more protection,or protect others seated. Folks that fall into the vulnerable group would be wise to swerve eating in,obv. Seated customers should be spaced appropriately,whereas queueing customers might be standing closer to each other.
    Until science proves it’s possible to eat with a mask on,its masks off.
    I thought you had to wear a mask on a plane?
    There’s the issue of you coming back from another country too, then travelling far and wide in the UK.

    A cinema will be similar to eating in a restaurant, although there will be more chance for transmission in a cinema, obv. If there are outbreaks,then masking up will be recommended.
    Or,maybe closed down again, but there hasn’t been problems with the ones that have opened across Europe.
    A lot of the mask wearing,or not, is based around the psychology of having to wear one.
    It’s inevitable that places will open up then close down again, but you have to try certain things.

    Folks will be catching the virus from many different settings, it’s here to stay.
    There is also far better treatment available and info about the virus that wasn’t there at the initial stage of infections in the UK.

    If I fell into the vulnerable group, I wouldn’t get too ambitious with my socialising or trips out.

    BS and Bollox👍
    Stay alert.










  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492
    chilling said:

    Firstly, this virus is going to be around for a very long time, so folks will have to get to grips with that. Taking every piece of advice the government give out as science based will leave you confused. The science has to be adapted to different situations, theatres.
    Knowing it will be around for however long, then the key word to take away from the shot below is ‘ limiting ‘.
    ‘ The Economy Does Matter’.

    Queuing for a takeaway should involve distancing and a mask inside a premises, so then at least there’s the chance that maybe 50% ? , could be anything, will have more protection,or protect others seated. Folks that fall into the vulnerable group would be wise to swerve eating in,obv. Seated customers should be spaced appropriately,whereas queueing customers might be standing closer to each other.
    Until science proves it’s possible to eat with a mask on,its masks off.
    I thought you had to wear a mask on a plane?
    There’s the issue of you coming back from another country too, then travelling far and wide in the UK.

    A cinema will be similar to eating in a restaurant, although there will be more chance for transmission in a cinema, obv. If there are outbreaks,then masking up will be recommended.
    Or,maybe closed down again, but there hasn’t been problems with the ones that have opened across Europe.
    A lot of the mask wearing,or not, is based around the psychology of having to wear one.
    It’s inevitable that places will open up then close down again, but you have to try certain things.

    Folks will be catching the virus from many different settings, it’s here to stay.
    There is also far better treatment available and info about the virus that wasn’t there at the initial stage of infections in the UK.

    If I fell into the vulnerable group, I wouldn’t get too ambitious with my socialising or trips out.

    BS and Bollox👍
    Stay alert.










    With all due respect that does nothing to address the question.

    Which was the Government claims to be following the science.

    The science has moved forward after discovering that the virus can be caught from droplets on surfaces, and through particles hanging in the air.

    Face masks obviously give protection to the wearer, and those around them.

    So why is there a need to wear a mask when purchasing a takeaway, but not when eating in.

    Which bit of the science makes eating in safer?

    Don't the particles hanging in the air make social distancing less effective?

    Why no masks in schools?

    Why don't you have to wear masks in cinemas, theatres, getting your nails done, or eyes tested?

    What is the difference between sitting next to someone on a plane, or the same person in the cinema.

    If the Government are implementing a save the economy policy, they should make this clear, instead of maintaining that they are following the science.

    They could then highlight the risk of not wearing masks in some settings.

    You must surely assume that there is a risk of infection when purchasing a takeaway, otherwise why make wearing a mask compulsory, this risk cannot disappear when eating in, yet there is no mask wearing requirement.

    If anything you would think that the risk increases through being on the premises longer, from the particles in the air and droplets on surfaces.

    The advice is confusing, and illogical, and does not keep the public informed.











    How about restaurants and takeaways?
    In England, face coverings do not have worn where it would be ''impractical''.
    That includes restaurants, pubs and gyms.
    They must be worn in a shop or cafe when buying food and drink to take away, but can be removed if you sit down to eat and drink.




    They are also optional in:
    Hairdressers and beauty salons
    Cinemas, concert halls and theatres
    Museums
    Dentists and opticians
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I can't read the article because I refuse to give the daily mail any of my bandwidth.

    School union hits out at Williamson’s ‘double standards’ over masks
    GMB has lashed out at confusion over the Government's advice on wearing masks at school




    Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, has been accused of “double standards” after the Government ordered people to wear mask in shops – but not in schools.
    GMB – the union for school staff – has written to Williamson, questioning the decision to “actively discourage” wearing masks in English schools – while expecting staff to wear masks on public transport and shops on the way to and from work.
    It is demanding “consistency and clarity” for school staff – and calling on Williamson to guarantee that PPE, including face masks, are available in schools and can be worn by staff.

    The letter, seen by The London Economic, adds: “GMB is fully supportive of the UK Government’s objective of eradicating coronavirus from our communities which we know have impacted disproportionately on the most vulnerable in our society.

    “It is therefore of great concern that the government’s announcement has produced a clear double standard between those entering shops and retail establishments in England from 24th July and our members who have been working in our schools throughout the lockdown period supporting the children of key workers and vulnerable children.
    “The prime minister has stated that members of the public should wear masks if they are ‘going to be in a confined space and (you) want to protect other people and to receive protection in turn’.




    “Our members working in schools, particularly with a full complement of pupils in September, are asking why they are expected to wear masks on public transport to get to work, in shops if they pop out at lunch time, but are actively discouraged from wearing them in schools.”

    https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/school-union-hits-out-at-williamsons-double-standards-over-masks/15/07/
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 12,492

    I doubt the govt said it was pointless. That'd be to extreme. The mail have probably taken something out of context or just made it up.

    Good question?

    “Our members working in schools, particularly with a full complement of pupils in September, are asking why they are expected to wear masks on public transport to get to work, in shops if they pop out at lunch time, but are actively discouraged from wearing them in schools.”
Sign In or Register to comment.