Re: Coronavirus
 

Based on some of my recent trips into supermarkets, I’m going to guess that most of those not wearing masks now, weren’t wearing them last month.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's been very good here for mask wearing [when it was a requirement] give it a few days and mask wearing will probably be a thing of the past for the majority.

I should also say that hardly anyone has followed the rules on gatherings and meeting up indoors around here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I wouldn't say that was anything to be particularly proud of.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't know that they were proud of it, i just observed that they did their own thing.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Many people I know have interpreted the rules to suit themselves and I think you’ll find it’s the same up and down the country.

The control freaks must be fuming.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

The point, my perfidious little radge packet ;) is that if those rates continue in that manner (unchecked) the nhs may well be at breaking point and we will be in lockdown again by early-mid September

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I dont know numbers, but i don't believe you can reasonably expect the frontline NHS to keep operating at the level they have for the past eighteen months. it's not sustainable.


re your second question. nothing at all, just joshing :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just been to my local butchers masks still required every one seemed happy to comply.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What people seem to conveniently forget about all this whining about being "pinged", is that a set of circumstances has occurred.
IE C(who may not have caught it) will have been pinged because of sufficient contact with B, who has the virus but may not reach the stage of being able to transmit it to C and others, who in turn has had sufficient contact with A, who not only has the virus, but has transmitted it to B.
Even if B & C don't suffer any effects and can't transmit it, A is still an ACTIVE threat, and may have transmitted it to many others, who in turn also may be an ACTIVE threat.
As long as people are being pinged, there is somebody else out there in the chain, with the virus and able and "willing" to transmit it to others.
B & C may possibly be "safe" to not have to self-isolate, but the indications are that there a large number of A's out there who are not "safe".
It's not the harmless situation it's being made out to be by the media.:mad:

Re: Coronavirus
 

given the above,

Are we not getting to a point where we (the government) needs to make a decision as to what is less damaging to the economy, reintroduction of some restrictions (I wont say lockdown) or allowing 'pingdemic' to continue?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The blog in the ZOE app stats a change in the data collection to account for increase in percentage vaccinates, use of LFT positives etc. My reading of this would be an increase in the numbers reporting infection.


I think that if other figures have also had adjustments comparative figures may be a tad difficult. Good sources will try to adjust or provide mechanisms to compare datasets. I'm guessing media outlets will simply show figures to get the best headlines.


I've not been shopping since 19th but I'll have a mask with me and while I loathe the thing I will likely use it if requested by store policy. (And don't forget to keep saying thank you to all those working in "these" jobs, I always try to say thank you to the cleaners and others like them doing the less glamorous tasks as well as the more obvious "front line" people.)

Re: Coronavirus
 

The bottom line is, the evidence of the effectiveness of masks is flimsy and always has been.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Mainly because the type of mask available to the public does not stop all particles from leaving or entering the individual. Only a full medical grade mask can do that.

Anyway the rule, when it existed, only said cover the face. Anything would do from a mask or scarf to a bandana. Some people only wore a transparent visor that had zero effectiveness.