Free UK Face Mask Exemption Cards Download Yours Now

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin


Trying to catch a virus with a cloth mask is like trying to catch a fly with a wire fence.

Only if the fly is travelling on the back of a brick

The vrius spreads on water droplets and mucus. Which ARE stopped by masks.

a reply to: Freeborn

I’ll retract that statement then, apologies. The BMJ did publish his opinion, it’s a journal I don’t think they have an editorial opinion as such.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Untrue, the virus particles will pass straight through the majority of face coverings.

a reply to: Grenade

The BMJ did publish his opinion, it’s a journal I don’t think they have an editorial opinion as such.

Serious question have you ever actually held a copy of the BMJ in your hand and flicked through it?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

No

a reply to: Grenade


That does not surprise me,

Look the fact of the matter is that several members have basically destroyed all of your arguments in this thread. Its quite clear to pretty much everyone other than yourself really that masks do not cause any harm to healthy adults you seem to struggle with this. Its either because your thick or have some pretty strong confirmation bias (I suspect for political reasons) either way nobody can change your mind so there is very little point in me or anyone else waisting any more time trying to explain this to you further.

a reply to: ScepticScot

I tend to take each subject based on its own merits. My opinions aren’t always based on partisan political thinking, even if you want to stereotype me as such.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Except you haven’t, other than grandstand and infer you’re an expert you haven’t posted a single source which addresses a single concern.

a reply to: Xabi87

More what will follow?

They aren't using this to impose any sort of draconian dictatorship on us.
How on earth does #ing the economy up further 'their' agenda?

The biggest problem with the first lockdown was that it didn't happen earlier....and then there have been the numerous inconsistencies and contradictions in legislation that have only served to confuse people.
Boris Johnson et al have been reactive and completely incapable of getting ahead of the game and their incompetence has been staggering.

But please explain to me what 'more will follow' actually means and why?
Please tell us straight exactly what you think 'they' are trying to achieve including why and how?

Quite obvious signs of MASS HYSTERIA on ATS



Remain calm, breathe...

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

I tend to take each subject based on its own merits. My opinions aren’t always based on partisan political thinking, even if you want to stereotype me as such.

You have already confirmed that your viewpoint os based on political views. As I said you are entitled to that. However you are trying to justify those views as being supported by medical evince when they just aren't as has been demonstrated by multiple posters.

People would respect you more if you just stated outright that you oppose the mandated wearing masks for ideological reasons, rather than you trying and failing to justify it on medical grounds

a reply to: ScepticScot

I truly believe face masks are detrimental to public health.

I was hoping for some clarity on my concerns and scientific evidence to the contrary. Instead rather ironically all I see is ideological rambling and side stepping of the issues I raised.

a reply to: Freeborn
You are missing the point, which I admit is not completely obvious.

Creeping regulations. Or for the simple, 'give an inch and they will take a mile'.

Throughout history this has happened, and that's why I say for some, it is only obvious in hindsight, when it is too late.

Yes, the idea of helping each other out by wearing a mask seems friendly enough, seems sensible. But it's not as simple as that.

Forced imposition based off the back of fear... Does that not ring a bell to you? Neighbours urged by local propaganda channels to snitch on their neighbours... does that not ring a bell to you?

"You must wear a mask"... yet there is no specification on what type of mask to wear, only that you must display the symbol... does that not ring a bell to you? Jesus, people are wearing plastic shields which hang 2 inches in front of their faces. People are wearing masks with exhalation valves!

Forced imposition based upon fear, the projection of 'stupidity' on anyone who doesn't follow the forced imposition... This is text book early stages of control. Have read any famous literature that describes this exact scenarios?

And YES - for us, right now it is not a major issue... but for the next generation and the one after that, who believe this everlasting imposed control is natural, they wont even recognise it because they were born into it... That's the major issue here... The MAJOR issue

History repeating itself... But it's only a little inconvenience isn't it?

a reply to: Grenade

....I’m in favour of personal liberty and have faith in people to make their own conscientious decisions about their personal safety.

And # other people who may suffer as a consequence of the decisions you've made about your 'personal safety'.

It's just a mask.
If something more intrusive I may sympathise or even agree with you......but its just a mask, a mild inconvenience at worst.
Just a mask.

a reply to: Freeborn

If something more intrusive I may sympathise or even agree with you

Textbook. It is never going to be "something more intrusive" because that is how creeping regulatory control works... sponn feed bit by bit, each time getting a little worse, but not enough so people find it intrusive.

Just a mask

.

Yes, you are completely correct.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: ScepticScot

I truly believe face masks are detrimental to public health.

I was hoping for some clarity on my concerns and scientific evidence to the contrary. Instead rather ironically all I see is ideological rambling and side stepping of the issues I raised.

The ideological one here is you. You have already confirmed in this thread that your view is based on political ideology.

Others have provided multiple links showing current medical advice is to wear a mask where social distancing is not practical. It is you choosing to ignore that.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: Freeborn

If something more intrusive I may sympathise or even agree with you

Textbook. It is never going to be "something more intrusive" because that is how creeping regulatory control works... sponn feed bit by bit, each time getting a little worse, but not enough so people find it intrusive.

Just a mask

.

Yes, you are completely correct.

Most of the measure that were put in place to control the virus have already been removed or reduced. Masks are part of the measures that allow us to go back towards normality and are not a permanent measure.

The sloppy slope erosion of freedoms argument is not supported at all by reality in this case.

a reply to: Grenade

The average lifespan of a doctor is much shorter than that of the general population. By roughly 10%

That's because they are driven to drink having to deal with the idiocy of the general public and the wilful ignorance displayed by them on issues like this!

But have you got a source for that and if so is it linked to the wearing of masks?

If not then really, where is the relevance?

a reply to: Freeborn

Do you have a source proving it’s not? You see how this works?

I’m not stopping you from wearing a mask, go for it. Enjoy the stale air.

a reply to: Grenade

Thanks for the apology.
I quoted the journals opinion in an earlier post.

In case you missed it;

Much remains unknown about the usefulness of population level mask wearing in the context of the covid-19 pandemic. Use of masks in healthcare settings is clearly essential to protect frontline workers, whereas the evidence supporting masks in non-clinical settings is both limited and of variable quality. Nonetheless, unlike stringent isolation and social distancing measures, which have substantial societal and economic costs, mass manufacture and use of cloth masks is cheap and easy, and may even facilitate economic activity.

Greenhalgh and colleagues argue that, given the gravity of the pandemic, indirect evidence of benefit combined with the low risk of harm should outweigh the absence of direct evidence supporting mask wearing by the general public.2 We agree. As we prepare to enter a “new normal,” wearing a mask in public may become the face of our unified action in the fight against this common threat and reinforce the importance of social distancing measures.

www.bmj.com...

Like I have said on numerous occassions now......wearing a mask MIGHT prevent the spread of this virus.
If it does great, if it doesn't then its just been a mild inconvenience.

The possible benefits far outweigh the possible drawbacks.