Face Masks to be made compulsory.

[antifootball]

I was out at the bakers this morning and one bloke was making a point of not wearing one. The staff reminded him but he still refused. He got served and went on his way, and the rest of us had a chat about our opinion of him.

[sinkov]

"I don't think you should worry so much about the agenda. There's countries that are far, far more corrupt than the UK and I don't think this is leading to anything more than wearing a mask."

No facts this time Anti, this is just my opinion. Making mask wearing mandatory in shops is a politically driven decision, and the political force driving this has an agenda and will not stop at just mandatory mask wearing in shops. There will be continuing pressure for this temporary measure to become permanent and compulsory mask wearing to be extending into all public areas.

Time will tell which of us is right, if you are right, then quite soon we will all be able to throw our masks in the bin and get back to walking around like normal human beings, which of course is what should happen, if I'm right, there will be no end in sight to mask wearing in the near future, and the areas where they have to be worn will be extended. We'll see, time will tell.

[sinkov]

I am happy to put a mask on while I do the shop until the risk has diminished sufficiently.

If you are not happy then follow BT's example and don't wear one. You'll be fine and no action will be taken.

At what point do you consider the risk will have diminished sufficiently 59 ? The last ONS figure I saw said just 1 person in 2,000 had the virus, so the likelihood of you encountering anyone with it on a shopping trip is remote, and should you encounter the 1 in 2,000 as long as you keep more than one meter away he/she cannot pass it on. So the risk of actually catching it while out shopping is virtually non-existent right now, but this isn't sufficient for you, so at what point does it become sufficient ?

I am not happy about wearing one, but I will wear one when I'm required to, and already have done, twice in the optician's and once in the newsagents.

[antifootball]

Yeah we'll see Sinkov. I certainly hope it doesn't become a permanent fixture. If it does and its not justified my protests will come at that time. I think for now its too early to assume that is what will happen, but you're right when you see we'll see.

I can see being forced to wear a mask long term being political, but don't see it that way yet. Over in the US its been used as a tool for one side to take a hit at another...I don't agree with that. I think everyone should be working together, not even country by country, but as a whole.

[1959_60]

I suppose you could play the odds sinkov.

i remember when you were telling us how safe it was to travel by train and we needn't use masks.

Taking your 1 in 2000 figure for infections...

If you took a train every day to work, and made the reverse journey, and assuming that you shared the carriage with 50 others then,

The chances of an infected person being in your carriage would be 1 in 40 for any given trip.

But you make ten trips a week, so the odds against being in the same carriage as an infected person drops to 1 in 4.

And then there's your shopping. Assume that you go to Tescos twice a week, and there are 100 people in there with you.

There is a one in 20 chance that an infected person is in the store with you. Twice a week means a 1 in 10 chance.

So just using the train twice a day, five times a week, plus two visits to the supermarket gives you odds of 1 in 3 that you will be in the same space as someone that is infected.

I suppose it depends how risk averse you are....but we are trying to reduce the odds by social distancing, washing our hands and by wearing masks.

And you would do the same if you were PM.

[sinkov]

"So just using the train twice a day, five times a week, plus two visits to the supermarket gives you odds of 1 in 3 that you will be in the same space as someone that is infected. I suppose it depends how risk averse you are....but we are trying to reduce the odds by social distancing, washing our hands and by wearing masks."

You talk about 'your figures' 59, they're not 'my figures', they're ONS figures, you can easily verify them by googling their website.

So you make ten train journeys a week, you go shopping in your local Tesco twice and you have a 33.3% chance of being in the same train carriage or supermarket as someone with the virus, there is twice as much chance that in those ten journeys and two shopping trips you will not encounter a single person with the virus. But suppose it's not your lucky week and you do happen upon that one virus carrier, well your mask won't protect you, but as long as you observe the correct social distancing measures, as I'm sure you do, as I do, then you won't contract the virus.

Just how risk averse are you 59 ? Over 26,000 people are killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents every year, I assume therefore that you don't travel by car, bus or coach, so how do you get around ? Or do you accept the risk ?

[antifootball]

You know there's people in the USA who believe the Covid vaccine is so the government can place tracking microchips under their skin. Luckily it's lunacy to believe such a thing.

[Norder]

.

You know there's people in the USA who believe the Covid vaccine is so the government can place tracking microchips under their skin. Luckily it's lunacy to believe such a thing.

not practically impossible - anti....in fact, would imagine it a fairly easy do nowadays.....but there's many who (willingly) already have an RFID (Radio-frequency identification) chip implant, and likely it's the way for all in the not far distant future - as for the Vaccine, you should be more worried about gene knockout and replacement - recoding your DNA, it's happening.

an E.U Parliament document from 2017.

The use of chip implants for workers

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDa...article_inline

[1959_60]

Just how risk averse are you 59 ? Over 26,000 people are killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents every year, I assume therefore that you don't travel by car, bus or coach, so how do you get around ? Or do you accept the risk ?

Yes Mon Ami, everything is a risk, including driving.

That's why I take precautions. I don't drink and drive. I practice social distancing and stay far enough back from the car in front, if my eyes are playing up I take a 60 mile test drive to check them out ***THIS BIT IS NOT TRUE***, I drive slower in bad visibility or if there is snow or ice, I make sure the car is in good fettle, tyres, oil, brakes, lights etc.

Same as anything (including Covid), there are no guarantees of safety, all you can do is take precautions.

[sinkov]

"Since July 17th, the daily death statistics from PHE have not been published directly by the Government, which is currently “investigating” them. But they do go on being input into the Government’s coronavirus dashboard, which is fed by PHE. Not only that, they continue to illustrate the official thesis that while the virus may be on its way out, it is going very, very, slowly. The rolling seven-day average number of deaths per day on July 26th was 66, holding its own with 68 the week before. No decline recorded at all – and 444 deaths reported by PHE in the week ending July 24th.

The thing is, though, that it is entirely mysterious where these deaths are occurring. For the week to July 24th there have so far been zero deaths reported in Scotland and Northern Ireland and just one in Wales. In the hospitals of England, the total recorded deaths (according to the NHS) were 67. So we have 376 unaccounted for (85% of them)."

Any ideas anyone ? Or are they just making it up as they go along ?