Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Don't Forget To Buy Your Face Masks.
33 Answers
Sky news tonight, proven that the effectiveness of face masks can reduce covid by up to 75%, our government and so called scientists have been telling us for 4 months that they have no effect? Just saying AGAIN. :0) May be something to do with that they don't want to supply us with them, like other countries have.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by teacake44. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.The (very limited) evidence from the Hong Kong study only shows that wearing masks might reduce the risk of transmission of Covid-19 by up to 75% when there's no social distancing in place.
That's exactly what social distancing does on its own anyway and there appears to be no sound evidence to show that there's any cumulative effect from adopting both measures simultaneously
That's exactly what social distancing does on its own anyway and there appears to be no sound evidence to show that there's any cumulative effect from adopting both measures simultaneously
in other words it's wise to wear them in the supermarket, where you never know who's going to leap out at you from the next aisle; less useful in the middle of Dartmoor.
I've been wearing one to Waitrose anyway, but I was surprised the authorities were so unenthusiastic about it. Still, sooner or later they'll have tried every policy going, and its opposite.
I've been wearing one to Waitrose anyway, but I was surprised the authorities were so unenthusiastic about it. Still, sooner or later they'll have tried every policy going, and its opposite.
Haven't worn one and don't intend to wear one.
If social distancing is maintained and unless somebody spits in my eye in a supermarket, I struggle to believe there's much risk.
I saw a woman at a distance in a field over the weekend walking her dog - other than me, there wasn't a soul about - I then saw her get into her car and drive-off. She had a face mask on, and whilst I'm no expert, I can confidently predict the risk of her catching the virus in an all but empty field and then her car, must be so close to zero to make the number negligible.
If social distancing is maintained and unless somebody spits in my eye in a supermarket, I struggle to believe there's much risk.
I saw a woman at a distance in a field over the weekend walking her dog - other than me, there wasn't a soul about - I then saw her get into her car and drive-off. She had a face mask on, and whilst I'm no expert, I can confidently predict the risk of her catching the virus in an all but empty field and then her car, must be so close to zero to make the number negligible.
Yes, if you're in a crowded train and a maskless Covid carrier sneezes/coughs over you, but not if you're sitting in your car on your own or walking in the park and keeping several metres apart from anyone. If you need a mask you or other people are too close.
My main concern about face coverings is that people don't know how to use them- people touch them to pull them away from their mouth/nose while they talk, smoke, sit in the sun
My main concern about face coverings is that people don't know how to use them- people touch them to pull them away from their mouth/nose while they talk, smoke, sit in the sun
‘accept it, get over it you lost’
Some Trumpian logic going on there.
Someone claims someone in an empty field can’t CATCH coronavirus.
Someone else points out masks don’t protect you from catching it.
1st person points out again (for some unknown reason) that field is empty.
2nd person reiterates his first point (as 1st person seems to have missed it)
1st person realises they’re wrong and tries to use some other spurious argument about bigger droplets. And then claims they have won!
Just like a Trump interview in slow motion. ROFL.
Some Trumpian logic going on there.
Someone claims someone in an empty field can’t CATCH coronavirus.
Someone else points out masks don’t protect you from catching it.
1st person points out again (for some unknown reason) that field is empty.
2nd person reiterates his first point (as 1st person seems to have missed it)
1st person realises they’re wrong and tries to use some other spurious argument about bigger droplets. And then claims they have won!
Just like a Trump interview in slow motion. ROFL.