www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000xr7m

Nick Robinson on Today this morning (2 mins 12) quizzing Grant Schapps. Interesting on 3 counts:

1. Robinson's complete u-turn on masks. "The evidence says that cloth masks offer no protection at all. Absolutely none."

2. Schapps goes on to almost concede this by saying that masks on TFL will remain compulsory partly so that vulnerable people (in particular people with compromised immune systems) can "feel more confident".

Is Robinson's u-turn just about a good story? There is no conflict in the interview if he doesn't take this position. Or how many of his colleagues have also known and believed this all along; while following the previous good story of a "killer plague" and extolling the use of masks?

If we are to wear masks to give "confidence" to people with compromised immune systems, then this will go on forever.

How have we moved from masks to stop killer plague to this nonsense with everyone just going along with it...?

I am seeing less and less masks by the day.

If people are two metres away AND you have both got a crappy mask on, it does give you "some" protection,
but a bit of cloth or plastic slung loosely across is no help at all, and people have not been made aware of their uselessness. (which to me, seems criminal)

If you have got a properly fitted "PPE N95 sort of mask" it makes no difference at all what other people are doing, because YOUR mask protects YOU.
It seems sensible to me to wear one if you are at particular risk.

However, these are not the masks that most of us have, and the N95s are very expensive and hard to get hold of, so vulnerable people who might have no choice but to use public transport are completely stuffed for the time being.

Protective masks could have been given out to those who need or want them.
or a the very least, a longer warning should have been given.

Yes I am sure proper masks achieve something. Interesting what you say Honey about vulnerable people not being given the facts about cloth face masks. I suppose it is the same point about obesity and Covid. They talk about individuals being "responsible" now; but how can they be after 18 months of being manipulated and not fully understanding the facts?

Honey wrote:
If people are two metres away AND you have both got a crappy mask on, it does give you "some" protection,
but a bit of cloth or plastic slung loosely across is no help at all, and people have not been made aware of their uselessness. (which to me, seems criminal)

If you have got a properly fitted "PPE N95 sort of mask" it makes no difference at all what other people are doing, because YOUR mask protects YOU.
It seems sensible to me to wear one if you are at particular risk.

However, these are not the masks that most of us have, and the N95s are very expensive and hard to get hold of, so vulnerable people who might have no choice but to use public transport are completely stuffed for the time being.

Protective masks could have been given out to those who need or want them.
or a the very least, a longer warning should have been given.

It should be down to the individuals. Remember when Individualism was a thing before 2020 ?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism


I have no issue with people wearing a face nappy if they think it's helps them, however respect those whose who don't want to wear them or one of those green lanyards.

To me masks are a social experiment, to see how far people obey rules. Another point is that they are nothing but placebos to scared members of the society.

In Mexico they don't care if you wear a mask or not.

Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
If people are two metres away AND you have both got a crappy mask on, it does give you "some" protection,
but a bit of cloth or plastic slung loosely across is no help at all, and people have not been made aware of their uselessness. (which to me, seems criminal)

If you have got a properly fitted "PPE N95 sort of mask" it makes no difference at all what other people are doing, because YOUR mask protects YOU.
It seems sensible to me to wear one if you are at particular risk.

However, these are not the masks that most of us have, and the N95s are very expensive and hard to get hold of, so vulnerable people who might have no choice but to use public transport are completely stuffed for the time being.

Protective masks could have been given out to those who need or want them.
or a the very least, a longer warning should have been given.

It should be down to the individuals. Remember when Individualism was a thing before 2020 ?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism


I have no issue with people wearing a face nappy if they think it's helps them, however respect those whose who don't want to wear them or one of those green lanyards.

To me masks are a social experiment, to see how far people obey rules. Another point is that they are nothing but placebos to scared members of the society.

In Mexico they don't care if you wear a mask or not.

It would be lovely if it could be left to the individual. But without the proper equipment, in a crowded place it is not possible.

They just need to explain to people what they need and give them a couple of weeks to sort it.

In a bonkers twist, Steve Rotherham (mayor) has failed to get compulsory masks on trains and busses, but succeeded for the ferries, even though currently we don't have to wear them, as it is nearly all open air.

Honey wrote:
In a bonkers twist, Steve Rotherham (mayor) has failed to get compulsory masks on trains and busses, but succeeded for the ferries, even though currently we don't have to wear them, as it is nearly all open air.

Who actually goes on a ferry sober ? They want to you to drink booze, so masks are needed.

Honey wrote:
Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
If people are two metres away AND you have both got a crappy mask on, it does give you "some" protection,
but a bit of cloth or plastic slung loosely across is no help at all, and people have not been made aware of their uselessness. (which to me, seems criminal)

If you have got a properly fitted "PPE N95 sort of mask" it makes no difference at all what other people are doing, because YOUR mask protects YOU.
It seems sensible to me to wear one if you are at particular risk.

However, these are not the masks that most of us have, and the N95s are very expensive and hard to get hold of, so vulnerable people who might have no choice but to use public transport are completely stuffed for the time being.

Protective masks could have been given out to those who need or want them.
or a the very least, a longer warning should have been given.

It should be down to the individuals. Remember when Individualism was a thing before 2020 ?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism


I have no issue with people wearing a face nappy if they think it's helps them, however respect those whose who don't want to wear them or one of those green lanyards.

To me masks are a social experiment, to see how far people obey rules. Another point is that they are nothing but placebos to scared members of the society.

In Mexico they don't care if you wear a mask or not.

It would be lovely if it could be left to the individual. But without the proper equipment, in a crowded place it is not possible.

They just need to explain to people what they need and give them a couple of weeks to sort it.

Either wear a mask or don't.

There is no evidence base for saying masks of any kind have directly reduced the deaths of people "with" Covid anywhere in the world.

I suspect the WHO - and this was their position too at the start of the panicdemic, don't forget - and Govs were advised masks would serve to frighten people into adherence to restrictions; and also act - as we are seeing on TFL - to give people "confidence" to get out again and so get the economy moving.

They saw how useful they would be to manipulate, and so changed their advice without a scientific basis to do so.

I suppose in some ways, then, masks may have reduced deaths by frightening people into remaining indoors and crossing roads to avoid peoplem

But let's all be grown up and move on now the fun is over....

Wyot wrote:
There is no evidence base for saying masks of any kind have directly reduced the deaths of people "with" Covid anywhere in the world.

I suspect the WHO - and this was their position too at the start of the panicdemic, don't forget - and Govs were advised masks would serve to frighten people into adherence to restrictions; and also act - as we are seeing on TFL - to give people "confidence" to get out again and so get the economy moving.

They saw how useful they would be to manipulate, and so changed their advice without a scientific basis to do so.

I suppose in some ways, then, masks may have reduced deaths by frightening people into remaining indoors and crossing roads to avoid peoplem

But let's all be grown up and move on now the fun is over....


So you still think it has nothing to do with the Great Reset ??

Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
In a bonkers twist, Steve Rotherham (mayor) has failed to get compulsory masks on trains and busses, but succeeded for the ferries, even though currently we don't have to wear them, as it is nearly all open air.

Who actually goes on a ferry sober ? They want to you to drink booze, so masks are needed.

What are you talking about? Apart from the special cruises with music and a bar, the ferries are just ordinary transport that people use to get to work or go shopping. No booze available.

Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
If people are two metres away AND you have both got a crappy mask on, it does give you "some" protection,
but a bit of cloth or plastic slung loosely across is no help at all, and people have not been made aware of their uselessness. (which to me, seems criminal)

If you have got a properly fitted "PPE N95 sort of mask" it makes no difference at all what other people are doing, because YOUR mask protects YOU.
It seems sensible to me to wear one if you are at particular risk.

However, these are not the masks that most of us have, and the N95s are very expensive and hard to get hold of, so vulnerable people who might have no choice but to use public transport are completely stuffed for the time being.

Protective masks could have been given out to those who need or want them.
or a the very least, a longer warning should have been given.

It should be down to the individuals. Remember when Individualism was a thing before 2020 ?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism


I have no issue with people wearing a face nappy if they think it's helps them, however respect those whose who don't want to wear them or one of those green lanyards.

To me masks are a social experiment, to see how far people obey rules. Another point is that they are nothing but placebos to scared members of the society.

In Mexico they don't care if you wear a mask or not.

It would be lovely if it could be left to the individual. But without the proper equipment, in a crowded place it is not possible.

They just need to explain to people what they need and give them a couple of weeks to sort it.

Either wear a mask or don't.



You cant unilaterally decide that you want the protection of a mask, because a "normal" mask is not effective without other people standing back from you and wearing them too,
UNTIL OR UNLESS you can get effective N95 masks, (which are outside some people's budgets) and then you will be protected no matter what other people are doing.

MOST masks are the sort that don't work on their own.

Green Man wrote:
[quote]Wyot wrote:


So you still think it has nothing to do with the Great Reset ??

No I think it was politicians responding to a media frenzy that wanted the plague to have arrived. A lot of them bought it; a lot didn't. But as soon as they started the fiction they could protect everyone from an airborne virus, as soon as the daily death figures began and were seen to be on their watch, the insanities began, and will be slow to stop...

Honey wrote:
Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
In a bonkers twist, Steve Rotherham (mayor) has failed to get compulsory masks on trains and busses, but succeeded for the ferries, even though currently we don't have to wear them, as it is nearly all open air.

Who actually goes on a ferry sober ? They want to you to drink booze, so masks are needed.

What are you talking about? Apart from the special cruises with music and a bar, the ferries are just ordinary transport that people use to get to work or go shopping. No booze available.

Then who I have been buying booze from then ?

Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
Green Man wrote:
Honey wrote:
In a bonkers twist, Steve Rotherham (mayor) has failed to get compulsory masks on trains and busses, but succeeded for the ferries, even though currently we don't have to wear them, as it is nearly all open air.

Who actually goes on a ferry sober ? They want to you to drink booze, so masks are needed.

What are you talking about? Apart from the special cruises with music and a bar, the ferries are just ordinary transport that people use to get to work or go shopping. No booze available.

Then who I have been buying booze from then ?

Are you talking about cross channel ferries? Not the ferry across the Mersey?

The booze is available on the little tourist cruises, but not on the run of the mill ten minute crossing over to Birkenhead.