Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Dear Government; please explain
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
wjlmarsh |
JK2006 wrote:
In January I read about this nasty though trivial virus in Wuhan; mild symptoms for the vast majority but dangerous and possibly lethal for the elderly or diabetic.
I'm 75 and Type 2. I ordered a good tight fitting face mask with triple carbon filters online.
It took 6 weeks to arrive (from China!) but was excellent. I cleaned it every day; sprayed it with alcohol based spirit.
Before it arrived I'd got a nasty cold or minor dose of Flu - self isolated as usual; spent a couple of days in bed. Paracetamol; liquids; sleep. I worried it might be Covid19 but my breathing remained fine and I fully recovered in 4-5 days.
Then the Lockdown kicked in.
I've worn the face mask whenever I've gone out once a day shopping, for exercise or medicines.
But Government called masks "worse than useless".
Then why, I wondered, did doctors and nurses wear them in hospitals?
Government changed advice. Don't buy them because they were required for medical staff.
What? Risk death in order to assist the incompetent NHS? Made no sense, especially if they were worse than useless.
I continued to wear it (very expensive, well made, reusable, strong).
I don't want to catch it and don't want to risk passing it on if I do.
Makes sense to me.
Now Government tells me it's compulsory to wear one.
Governed by donkeys.
JK I agree it is amusing.
The information from "the experts" has been varied thus I think the government even if they have good researchers will find available information conflicting. Your argument about medical staff using masks is very valid. And Asian countries have been using masks for a long time and have not had any mass outbreak.
This particular virus definitely is a chance for much learning from. To me that is the key issue for WHO, scientists, government and if we are very lucky for the media to ask the right questions and appropriate challenges. One thought I have is "Critical mass" if an infected person and recipient close by are not wearing masks then the recipient will receive a full dose, huge quantiy of the virus (maybe critical mass level idea that tiggers a critical level infection) - if the person sneezes or coughs in close proximity. One or both persons wearing masks will reduce the quantity of the virus. Thus a small dose that may act more like a vaccine in that the recipient still gets infected but a little that produces the antibodies so next time the recipient is now immune. |
|
wyot |
Greg wrote:
Chas Smash wrote:
Prince Charles is of the opinion that we can 'reset' the economy and rebuild it to be eco friendly.
This coming from a bloke who got a Third from Cambridge ('massaged' by RAB Butler to a mighty 2:2), and who has since been assured how clever he is by grovelling idiots desperate for a gong. Thanks for the lecture, Chuck. Now shut up and remember what happened in 1649.
What did you get and from where Greg?
Just want to check so I can decide what weight to place on your proferred insights, character and suitability for execution or not? |
|
Green Man |
Why do people always vote for the main 3 parties. You need to look at the Libertarian Party UK manifesto. |
|
Greg |
Chas Smash wrote:
Prince Charles is of the opinion that we can 'reset' the economy and rebuild it to be eco friendly.
This coming from a bloke who got a Third from Cambridge ('massaged' by RAB Butler to a mighty 2:2), and who has since been assured how clever he is by grovelling idiots desperate for a gong. Thanks for the lecture, Chuck. Now shut up and remember what happened in 1649. |
|
Davo |
JK2006 wrote:
But Government called masks "worse than useless".
When did 'The Government' ever actually say that? I recall a Government advisor, in an answer to a specific question, say they were okay for protecting others from you, but no help for protecting you from others. But where's the source for this? |
|
|
|
