Know your risk: Covid 19

Joined
15 Sep 2017
Messages
40,639
Reaction score
3,838
Location
Sussex
Country
United Kingdom
interesting to see a chart listing the risks, I know its not scientific etc

EcOilupWAAEhfnO
 
Sponsored Links
Its also an American list too......

Going to a bar is apparently high risk , oh dear that's me screwed then lol
 
Going to a bar in Texas - probably a higher risk of being shot by a redneck
 
LOL I love number 1.

When this started I watched the infection spread across the country partly due to some people taking the pee out of B'ham. London too. Joking about it as their infection levels were low. Some even put down all of their problems down to ethnics often via some distorted ideas about how people live. True in some cases but by no means all and that just explains households really.

SAGE predicted where spread from airports would go. Not possible to see it that clearly but wouldn't argue. However it's very easy for people in the UK to visit various cities, towns and even villages as most can easily be reached via a car and the motorways show that people travel daily all over the place from A to B many long distances. So it spreads with limited numbers being infected and then grows slowly until with some variation infection rates in areas even out, some higher than B'ham's. Some still very low as few visitors is the norm.

Then how does it spread when it gets there. Shops is the only wide spread commonality especially as we all need to eat. Work places too but people in those go near others in shops. Pubs etc too but the same applies. Lock down changed how we shop and infection rates fell. Other lock down aspects will have done that as well but it still leaves shopping as a major reason for spread. Other areas would tend to localise it eg meat factories of late.

:) That's my theory anyway. It's interesting that some areas exploded - maybe down to people not worrying much as they did have low infection rates when it started.

But behind all this is people who have no symptoms and maybe super spreaders. Only thing that can be done about those is masks. They might help and seem to have in other countries. Did China and some others distance for instance?
 
Sponsored Links
If it's true, it is confusing as to why some things have been allowed for a while that are higher risk than those things not allowed.

I would say you have a lower risk of catching Covid, sharing a plane with an infected person than eating at their house.
 
would say you have a lower risk of catching Covid, sharing a plane with an infected person than eating at their house.

People have been infected on a plane so depends on how effective the provisions are. One of the complications is recirculate air and sterilising as well.

Now the blame game has started 2 gov ministers mentioned that they were not aware of asymptomatic infection on the lunch time news today. I've always thought putting it down to coughing and spluttering etc was rather short sighted.

:) Maybe they should use older people in the same way canaries were used in mines. Get them to spend way more time in touchy areas to get hospital cases more quickly.

;) As they only whisper masks in shops at odd time and never ever shout it from the roof tops I feel like a covid canary anyway.
 
Last edited:
Whenever I go on a long-haul flight, cooped up with hundreds of other people in a sealed container with few air changes, I expect to emerge having caught coughs, colds or worse.

What do you expect?
 
;) As they only whisper masks in shops at odd time and never ever shout it from the roof tops I feel like a covid canary anyway.


Lots on mask-wearing yesterday on R5L, after Tom Hanks weighed into the debate.

What was consistently not stated though, was that mask - wearing is only effective if :

- it is of suitable type and grade,
- it fits the wearer,
- it is worn correctly,
- it is worn with discipline (not much use for instance, if the wearer keeps scratching their nose, and also handling common public touch points).

Masks can also give a false sense of security, e. g. two wearers holding a prolonged conversation are likely negating any benefit the masks might be giving them.
 
Not convinced that is true,at all....
spending 4 hours on a plane with 300 other people and the air con circulating the air around like a germ fog.

and theres all those people at airports, where you need to queue with, walk past...

I think air travel is a definite risk factor.
 
Lots on mask-wearing yesterday on R5L, after Tom Hanks weighed into the debate.

What was consistently not stated though, was that mask - wearing is only effective if :

- it is of suitable type and grade,
- it fits the wearer,
- it is worn correctly,
- it is worn with discipline (not much use for instance, if the wearer keeps scratching their nose, and also handling common public touch points).

Masks can also give a false sense of security, e. g. two wearers holding a prolonged conversation are likely negating any benefit the masks might be giving them.

They have been wrapped up in masks to prevent people from becoming infected. SAGE mentioned early on that masks do help prevent the infected from spreading from infected people. They still do in a more recent paper but comments still tend to relate to preventing a wearer from being infected. That would also need regular mask changes and really a face shield.

I may have mentioned China - did they use distancing. I have seen several things on TV that suggest they didn't. One solid comment was when China eased lock down - wear masks outside if you want but always wear when entering a building. That includes their apartment blocks - remove when in your own space. That is also one of the places where I have seen a complete lack of distancing.

Also shops and face coverings has been muttered many times during briefs on the basis of when to wear one.

Just like the USA we get this - make one rather than buy. There are plenty available and costs are low especially at the cheap surgical end.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ng/how-to-wear-and-make-a-cloth-face-covering
 
They have been wrapped up in masks to prevent people from becoming infected. SAGE mentioned early on that masks do help prevent the infected from spreading from infected people. They still do in a more recent paper but comments still tend to relate to preventing a wearer from being infected. That would also need regular mask changes and really a face shield.

Caught between two stools there: does the mask protect the wearer, or "the others"?
I stand to be corrected, but "traditionally", wearing a mask was almost always for the purpose of protecting the wearer. You are correct though when you state that, in the case of Covid-19, you'd also need eye protection.

For the reasons I've given previously (as well as diverting precious supplies from healthcare workers), masks to protect the wearer directly won't work; I've witnessed trained and educated people gaining no protection from the RPE they're wearing, so the general public will likely fare even worse.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top