And yet the randomised control trials on masks don't seem to substantiate the results of mechanistic studies. Using the same standard of evidence for drugs as what we have used for masks, we'd be forcing people to take prophylactic doses of HCQ.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The case for and against the effectiveness of face coverings and the mandating of their use
- Thread starter yorkie
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
No, cases are stable at approximately 30k per day at the moment and are on a week-by-week downward trajectory.
You can find the numbers for this literally anywhere on the internet.
In case you’re unable to do this, here is a link to help you:
United Kingdom COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer
United Kingdom Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info
Green tractor
Member
cases are starting to rise again, by tomorrows update the 7 day average will probably be slightly up. That is only a problem if it translates into an increase in the number in hospital, which depends on the vaccine uptake.
There is no evidence they make a difference; you cannot answer the questions because the data simply does not support your claims.
The wearing of effective well fitting FFP3 type masks would make a difference, but there is no evidence that wearing standard masks makes any difference to transmission levels; if it did, you would expect to see some pattern in the data from different countries that have implemented (and in some cases lifted) mask mandates
It's good practice to provide a quote with a link you provide; I have looked at the link again today (I am already familiar with it, of course) and it does not show cases rising.
cases are starting to rise again, by tomorrows update the 7 day average will probably be slightly up. That is only a problem if it translates into an increase in the number in hospital, which depends on the vaccine uptake.
Cases were widely expected to have risen massively by now, but so far they have not. They still might (and in the autumn I would absolutely expect them to, of course), but given we have such high vaccination rates (we are very soon going to hit 89% of adults with at least one dose, and are imminently hitting 75% with two doses) we could have many times more people being infected and it would not translate into the sort of deaths or hospitalisations that would cause serious problems. Don't forget that influenza regularly causes challenges each year.
I don't see how mask wearing is relevant to any potential increase in cases; there is no evidence that the widespread wearing of standard flimsy masks makes any difference to case rates. Any increase in cases will be down to increased social mixing and nothing to do with whether people wear masks or not.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
They're rising again - moderately - in all parts of the UK regardless of whether there is a mask mandate or not because there is increased social contact. England (no mask policy) is not discernible from Scotland (mask law still in place) or any of the other devolved administrations in this respect.
The mask rules as social policy don't make any difference to the case numbers.
Nicholas Lewis
Established Member
English hospitalisation levels have been on slightly reducing trend over the last week as well as those in ICU. The other key figure is there have been just over 7000 admissions on the 10 days preceding 4th August (latest PHE data) but total number in hospital are down a few hundred over same timeframe indicating the much reduced duration of stay in hospital.
cases are starting to rise again, by tomorrows update the 7 day average will probably be slightly up. That is only a problem if it translates into an increase in the number in hospital, which depends on the vaccine uptake.
Freightmaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 3,495
Despite many of the 300+ posts in this thread attempting to argue otherwise, the above sentence is indisputable.
MARK
fireftrm
Member
There is evidence that mask wearing reduces transmission, you just happen to be anti-mask so won't accept it. The WHO, US and UK medical researchers and the ONS all show that mask wearing reduces transmission, reduced transmission means reduced cases. Here the ONS figures demonstrated a reduction of around 75% in COVID transmission within a railway carriage, comparing 90% mask wearing to 50% mask wearing. SO half the number wearing and COVID transmission quadruples. That cases haven't reached the 100k + that some predicted is not understood, but the it is summer, more people are outdoors rather than being inside with others and the number of tests has dropped, Check in for Track and Trace isn't being used as widely etc, but our very high vaccination rates, now dropped to 6th in Europe, are keeping sever illness down but the 25% not yet fully vaccinated means an awful lot of transmission and the possibility of new variants. Of course that's adults and so it's almost 100% of under 18s not vaccinated......
Citation needed
Ad hominem arguments do not advance a rational discussion, and are not a substitute for verifiable evidence.
Last edited:
That sounds impressive, but you appear to have accidentally forgotten to include the link to these “ONS” figures.
Freightmaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 3,495
I've just done a bit of people watching in Exeter. Of the people wearing masks in shops, only 25% were wearing them correctly. Most were nose hanger outs or chin hammocks.
On the train now up the Tarka Line. Many people got on at Exeter St. David's wearing masks. They all took them off when they sat down. What a waste of time.
On the train now up the Tarka Line. Many people got on at Exeter St. David's wearing masks. They all took them off when they sat down. What a waste of time.
and that’s why I stopped bothering to wear one a few days prior to the July 19th relaxation - if the general public can’t make the effort to wear them properly then there’s not really much point me wearing one. It’s enough to make you question whether “wear a mask over your nose and mouth” really has been on repeat for the last year...
Something I’ve noticed quite frequently is people wearing one, taking them off a while later to eat/drink, then keeping them off after they’ve finished for the rest of the journey.
fireftrm
Member
Citations:
Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas
Evidence review of face masks against COVID-19 by the National Academy Of Sciences, USA
The Lancet - report on the use of masks against COVID-19
Journal of the American Medical Association, effectiveness of maks wearing
Ad hominem - in Yorkie's post my point was not to provide any evidence for mask wearning, instead his use of post deletions to promote his/rejection of any pro-maskl viewpoints own views fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt and nemoiudex in caus sua
So in other words you weren't adding any useful evidence to a rational discussion, you were just making an ad hominem fallacy.
fireftrm
Member
Not a single straw grasped there only facts. If you work for a mailine railway company you would be aware that the RSSB have statistics to show how effective mask wearing is at reducing transmission. Basic biology (GSCE) would give you the knowledge that viruses mutate and to do so need to have multiple hosts, so the greater the case numbers the greater the likelihood of new variants. Yours is a reply showing ignorance, whether inate or like Yorkie's because it suits your idealogy
No I was stating facts, I was not making a fallacy argument against a man
Yet another ad hominem post
Your logical fallacy is ad hominem
You attacked your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.
yourlogicalfallacyis.com
That's face masks. There is plenty of evidence surrounding their effectiveness when handled and worn correctly. However they have never been mandatory in this country. The UK has mandated face coverings. Very different, and normally worn incorrectly (chin it, bin it) and stuffed in a pocket.
Bantamzen
Established Member
I didn't get beyond that first link. And here's why:
Or in other words, masks only potentially work well when used under strict medical protocols. Next time you are out and about, take a look at the people using them and tell me they are using them as if they where in a medical scenario. I'll leave the rest off your post & pompous Latin for others to deal with. But thanks for debunking yourself!
I hate to be picky, but none of those sources are from the ONS as you promised above. They also don’t address the issue I have with face coverings, which is that imperfectly sealed masks project aerosols out of the left and right side, which increases the risk to those sitting directly adjacent to other people on trains, which is where people are most likely to be in closest proximity. Hence why I’d have been interested to see the study that related to public transport, which it appears you don’t have after all.
fireftrm
Member
That's a very stupid argument, the point of a face mask is to reduce transmission. Yes transmission is much more effectively reduced if the everyone wears one, but the use is to lower the spread to others from any virus you may be shedding and to reduce any inhalation of any virus particles by you. To say you stopped wearing one because others weren't, or were wearingthem incorecctly is plain idiocy. Damn yourself to damn others?
I did not promise anything, I only referred to it. As to incorrectly fitted masks you are quite right, I have that same issue with visors, allt hey do is direct any exhaled air down and if I'm sat down a server/ticket checked is almost certainly above me.....
If you want to see the studies related to public transport, in this case railways, you will need to be a member of the RSSB. They hold fortnightly COVID updates for members and that's where the railway companies are getting their guidance. The RSSB use the ONS.
The fact that you are claiming “damn idiocy” here despite the complete lack of credible evidence and rational, researched thinking you have undertaken is laughable.
Are you really saying that the difference between us making it out of the pandemic safely, effectively and within the constrains of the National Health Service is whether the majority of the population are willing to place a (normally dirty) piece of cloth over their face when indoors and mixing with others?
You must realise how ridiculous this is…
Your claims of "anti-mask" and accusation of refusing to accept evidence are very much ad hominem. In the post I quoted you even admitted that your aim was not to provide evidence but to make an ad hominem attack.
fireftrm
Member
You didn't bother to read further...but neither did you even bother to read what you quoted. Firstly you managed to extract one sentence to make an argument that the evidence doesn't support general mask wearing, but you failed. The rest of the poage includes other sentences such as "The available evidence suggests that near-universal adoption of nonmedical masks when out in public, in combination with complementary public health measures, could successfully reduce Re to below 1, thereby reducing community spread if such measures are sustained." This CLEARLY shows trhat your extract (below this) does NOT refer to masks only working when sued iunder strict medical protocols. It simply says that authorities should, as well as stating the importance of wearing masks, give guidance on how they should be worn, cleaned and disposed of. Of course that's exactly what the Government have done on this page about face mask wearing https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-to-make-your-own#how-to-wear-a-face-covering. There has been plenty of public information on this
Okay kiddo.
Masks [might] only stop you passing the virus on if you have the virus.
Quite frankly, I, like many others, am sick of constantly living and acting as if a healthy person is sick.
I, and my entire social circle, are double-jabbed, previously infected, and test negative for work several times a week. Masks are, to my mind, a charade when the chances of me having the virus (whilst not zero) are exceedingly small. And if the three other blokes (for example) in my train carriage have their masks under their chin, they clearly don’t care too much about protecting others, so I’m not going to make myself uncomfortable and wear a mask to protect them from a virus I almost certainly haven’t got.
Happy now?
Last edited:
fireftrm
Member
The fact that you ignore rational research from the links provided, after I was asked to do so, are from rational research establishments. You further err by making out that I have somehow, or somewhere said anything like facer masks being our way out of the pnademic. That is an abolutely clear piece of damned idiocy from you. Point out where I have said that? The issue is face masks will not stop COVID, but that they are a tool in reducing the number of cases and the likelihood of new mutations is.
There’s that word. “Could”. Not “will”, not “are proven to”, not “have demonstrated an ability to”, but “could”. This is clearly not evidence, but a hypothetical conclusion derived from a situation with many differences to the one you are claiming supports your point of view. Medical masks, treated properly, do work. FFP2 and 3 masks, when properly fit-tested, are exceptionally good at protecting the user. Dirty pieces of cloth are not.
Do you support the mandation of these measures to keep masks as effective as possible? I would argue the majority do not wear masks for “protection” purposes, but simply to comply with the law and to follow the crowd.
fireftrm
Member
I'm happy as you are saying that you are happy to catch it. I'm not happy that you may have and then transmut it whilst still in ther phase where a result using a lateral flow test is yet to show positive, or before you test positive
I'll take could in preference to would anytime - doing this could help save your life is better than not doing. Dirty pieces of cloth are nowhere as effective as good masks, clearly not, but they still reduce transmission to soem extent. I'd rather others wore that than nothing. As to mandating, well yes I do support that. As you say there are far too many selfish people out there who won't do the right thing unless told to
So you would rather be uncertain if they help or not than definitely know they do? (Which they don’t)
So could:
Exercising every other day
Eating a perfectly balanced diet, carefully calculated by a dietician, not in excess of 2,000 calories (women) or 2,500 calories (men)
Never drinking
Never smoking
Never crossing the road again (you COULD get run over)
Never taking the train, bus or plane again (they COULD crash!)
Never visiting a friend again (they COULD have an infection which your immune system COULD run a risk of not agreeing with)
Do you follow all these religious and support the mandation of these measures as they COULD save lives as well?
No? Why not? Do you feel it’s “not worth it” and that living a normal life is worth the minimal risk associated with this? Well masks are the same to a large proportion of people (myself included). I would happily take the chance of getting COVID (double vaxxed) instead of keeping the mask mandate.
fireftrm
Member
How utterly bizarre.
- Status