Coronavirus

[johnb]

The argument about facemasks reminds me of those about Brexit. People's views were mostly based on gut reactions - they then selected arguments to reinforce their opinions.

Today's number of cases is 17,540. Not good - especially when infections are doubling in seven days or less in significant areas of the country.

[Bryn]

Given the upswing in infections of late, I ordered a pack of 10 polycarbonate face shields last night to supplement the essential surgical mask when shopping and travelling on public transport. This, mainly due to the number of people failing to wear face covering or wearing it inadequately. Why a pack of 10? I do not expect an early end to this health emergency. Flu jab booked for a week Saturday.

[Frances_iom]

the only thing that still seems to continue to happen is receiving text messages.

if it's off (no power) then it can't receive text messages - however as the phone needs to go through various handshakes (eg to confirm it has a valid SIM etc) when switched back on , these handshakes may well see the transfer of short messages that were queued in the network awaiting such a re- activation. Presume these messages get dumped if not delivered within a set time.

[Dave2002]

Which reminds me, and at the risk of going temporarily off topic. At what level of functionality, for want of a better term, does a mobile phone become a tracking device? I can make and receive calls and texts on my phone and text messages can be left on it when it's switched off(which is at least 90% of the time). It has no connectivity beyond that, so no chance of Serco T&T etc, but what level of monitoring of my location and movements would be [are] possible?

A heck of a lot more than you may be aware of!

OK - less if you have it powered down or battery runs flat.

[Dave2002]

if it's off (no power) then it can't receive text messages - however as the phone needs to go through various handshakes (eg to confirm it has a valid SIM etc) when switched back on , these handshakes may well see the transfer of short messages that were queued in the network awaiting such a re- activation. Presume these messages get dumped if not delivered within a set time.

You may presume that - but I might be able to imagine circumstances under which they don't.

[Dave2002]

One of my brothers lives in Hong Kong. It has kept a tight lid on Covid primarily because they all wear masks.

While my overall feeling is to agree with you, this is still an example of post hoc ergo propter hoc. This is not always sound reasoning.

[Frances_iom]

I suspect the masks even when properly worn would allow very fine droplets of virus laden spit to escape otherwise the wearer could not breathe but would hold back larger droplets - likewise the outer surface would impede entry of fine aerosols but again not entirely - however combined with social distancing and the reminder that they give not to touch mouth or nose they would reduce considerably the viral load. However in close encounters, as in the 1918 flu epidemic they offer only very partial protection.
That said a significant number of people seem to treat them as though their presence even if not covering nose etc is protection enough - rather like the old Catholic tradition of wearing 'holy' amulets against the plague

[muzzer]

Surely a combination of sensible measures is the way forward? Given the lack of reliable data. By reliable I mean proven to base effective prevention upon. I’m truly exasperated at the state of the government’s approach, I have to say the debate on here has been mostly well tempered and considerate, and long may it continue,

[oddoneout]

if it's off (no power) then it can't receive text messages - however as the phone needs to go through various handshakes (eg to confirm it has a valid SIM etc) when switched back on , these handshakes may well see the transfer of short messages that were queued in the network awaiting such a re- activation. Presume these messages get dumped if not delivered within a set time.

That would fit with what happens sometimes when I switch it on to use it and then get interrupted by a message coming through which has evidently been waiting its chance to land!

[Serial_Apologist]

I suspect the masks even when properly worn would allow very fine droplets of virus laden spit to escape otherwise the wearer could not breathe but would hold back larger droplets - likewise the outer surface would impede entry of fine aerosols but again not entirely - however combined with social distancing and the reminder that they give not to touch mouth or nose they would reduce considerably the viral load. However in close encounters, as in the 1918 flu epidemic they offer only very partial protection.
That said a significant number of people seem to treat them as though their presence even if not covering nose etc is protection enough - rather like the old Catholic tradition of wearing 'holy' amulets against the plague

I wold have thought any reduction of risk consequent on mask wearing is better than none; and, with others masking up, the reduction risk would be multiplied, roughly, no?

[Richard Barrett]

I would have thought any reduction of risk consequent on mask wearing is better than none; and, with others masking up, the reduction risk would be multiplied, roughly, no?

Exactly. Although, as Frances says, many people seem not to have realised that the nose is connected to the respiratory tract.

[Bryn]

Exactly. Although, as Frances says, many people seem not to have realised that the nose is connected to the respiratory tract.

Indeed, and all too many of those who do seem to have grasped the role of the nasal passages have not quite grasped the rationale of the malleable strip in the upper reaches of surgical and other face masks, so fail to mould it to the bridge of their nose in order to reduce the amount of air reaching their nose and mouth unfiltered.

[Richard Barrett]

the malleable strip in the upper reaches of surgical and other face masks

- you mean the 5G antenna put there to track people's movements and give them cancer?

[Richard Barrett]

Here's a detailed article from Nature about masks.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8?fbclid=IwAR1wE0RSgjkrwlk37HZTHN2YJbJmGXgpvb2NeWXrHsgefSQaaRQljtRrmzc

Summarised: people ought to wear them.

[teamsaint]

Anybody who is actually interested in investigating can easily enough find good quality material that consistently says that in many situations the evidence for the benefits of mask wearing is weak, that the benefits of cloth face coverings are certainly unproven. as most if not all research has been on medical mask wearing in care contexts, and that the possible negative effects, eg recycling damp infected breath, are also poorly researched.

So,again , it is important to keep asking the questions,( and to just try to get away from the binary mask conversation that we seem unable to escape ) because for every Hong Kong there is a France, and at the moment, it really does seem unclear what is effective and what isn’t.