Face coverings

[Mesterh]

49 minutes ago, Johnsond said:

Yeah must be the case eh. ?

Well yes!

I think it's best to take advice from the majority of professional experts rather than just someone who has no expertise in the relevant field and just decided that they know what's best. 

I'm not sure how that can be reasonably argued against tbh.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

13 minutes ago, Mesterh said:

Well yes!

I think it's best to take advice from the majority of professional experts rather than just someone who has no expertise in the relevant field and just decided that they know what's best. 

I'm not sure how that can be reasonably argued against tbh.

Where are you getting your advice from then?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

8 minutes ago, Big J said:

It's been a couple of years since I was last there (on account of being in Devon), so I was unaware of the changes. 

 

It's a public forest. The Commission has a duty to provide access and if the public is enthusiastic (in their numbers) to visit, accommodation ought to be made. It's 50 square miles (32k acres) and it's a great place to enjoy being outside, get some exercise and socially distance

But there is somebody in a hi-viz telling you you you can’t use / access a public asset because they have implemented their interpretation of current “guidelines”

 

They must be better qualified / entitled / empowered than you are to take due care of your family....

 

[Mark J]

10 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

But there is somebody in a hi-viz telling you you you can’t use / access a public asset because they have implemented their interpretation of current “guidelines”

 

They must be better qualified / entitled / empowered than you are to take due care of your family....

 

Only if they have a clipboard and a pair of gloves.

[Mark Bolam]

Which they wear all day....

[Khriss]

......no bears then  ? Sod that  ?  K

[Mesterh]

1 hour ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Yes the article was from April and given the pace and gravity of 'hot news' topics over the past 12-24 months, 3 months could be described as ancient history in headline terms.

 

So a lot can change in 3 months....

 

Politics, headlines, emotions, trends, beliefs....

 

But not science.  The findings of the scientists that were reported in April, based upon the research stated in the article, all still stands true.  It must do otherwise it was bullocks to start with (possible I guess.)

 

What has changed in the 3 months since April is the political desire to redefine the interpretation of pre-existing peer reviewed science so that it marries up with current political doctrine.

 

This is self evident from the increasing chasm between scientists and politicians.

 

Referring to WHO / CDC is all very well, but without a reference it is little more than MSM hype.   The actual WHO guidance from 5 Jun (latest) is attached below - hardly a glowing reference for face coverings huh...

 

Here is WHO latest guidance:

 

 

Whether or not masks are used, compliance with hand hygiene, physical distancing and other infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are critical to prevent human-to- human transmission of COVID-19.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You mentioned something about links before you edited your post.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

WWW.CDC.GOV

---

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a virus (more specifically, a coronavirus)...

 

Q&A: Masks and COVID-19

WWW.WHO.INT

 

There have been medical experts who said we should have had face coverings from the start but the lack of ppe soon put a stop to those suggestions. 

Depends what you read and who you believe, there will always be arguments for and against. Look what happened in regards to measels due to ant-vaxx believers. 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

17 minutes ago, Mesterh said:

You mentioned something about links before you edited your post.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

WWW.CDC.GOV

---

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a virus (more specifically, a coronavirus)...

 

Q&A: Masks and COVID-19

WWW.WHO.INT

 

There have been medical experts who said we should have had face coverings from the start but the lack of ppe soon put a stop to those suggestions. 

Depends what you read and who you believe, there will always be arguments for and against. Look what happened in regards to measels due to ant-vaxx believers. 

The edit was to include the screenshot extract of the WHO guidance. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have any issue with someone exercising their personal judgement and wearing a covering if that’s what they want to do. 
 

It’s the sanctimonious BS from those that need to be TOLD what to do, and then think they can project their own insecurities onto those that don’t feel the need to be told what to do that grips me. 
 

It’ll be like clap for the NHS volume / enthusiasm shaming come 24th...

 

”...you’re not wearing a mask - you bastard!...” 

 

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

The new sign of being a complete dickhead will be those that are wearing a covering but not wearing it properly (Top of the head, tucked under chin etc) - just to prove how gullible, stupid and malleable they actually are....

[Mesterh]

2 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

The new sign of being a complete dickhead will be those that are wearing a covering but not wearing it properly (Top of the head, tucked under chin etc) - just to prove how gullible, stupid and malleable they actually are....

I certainly wont disagree with that. There is enough information out there to show how to wear them properly, although you would think common sense would prevail in actually using it to cover their mouth and nose.