Coronavirus

[Juggz]

Not using anything against you, just interested to see where the anti-mask thing is coming from. I don't watch telly, I don't do social media, so I have no idea where this sentiment comes from. Using a mask to make it harder for crap to leave your mouth seems like basic common sense to me and the objections to it are, from my perspective at least, baffling. They still are. Like the demonisation of "the left" in the other thread, I'm not exposed to this kind of stuff in my usual day-to-day activities so am curious to get behind the sensationalism to see where it's coming from.

From the link you just posted

A cloth face covering should cover the nose and go under the chin and:

    fit snugly but comfortably against the side of the face
    be secured with ties or ear loops
    include at least 2 layers of fabric
    allow for breathing without restriction

Wash daily in a hot wash over 60 degrees with detergent.

It would be interesting to know the spec of the mask used in the Vietnamese study, were they single layer masks and how regularly were they cleaned/replaced, if at all? It stands to reason that these are factors which, unfortunately, aren't clarified in the report.

I've been using medical masks in shops and the like since the lockdown started (since you asked earlier) and, since there was previously no clarification on the kind of masks people were taking umbrage to, I, naturally, assumed the objection was to all masks since we all just said "masks" and not "cloth masks"  . The HSE should go to Woodies if they're short, there are loads of them there 

[astfgyl]

I'm honestly not anti mask in the slightest. I'm not convinced about them (cloth ones) but I'm definitely not against anyone else doing whatever they want. I just get caught up in arguing the toss over these things more than they actually bother me. Sure if medical masks were no good for people, why have they been used in the hospitals for all these years? I also don't think cloth masks will harm anyone as it happens.

I just feel that their becoming compulsory is more about politics than public health.

I was wearing them going into shops and whatnot since they were recommended a couple of weeks before it became an offence not to, and that was mostly because if I didn't I was one of the only few not doing it. I've also had to wear them in work from the get go and I often try smoke a fag only to realise I have a mask on, so the thing in itself doesn't affect me. When I look around at everyone with the cloth masks, I feel like I'm looking at one of the symptoms of the illness that is the whole world going mad but somebody said to me that maybe the effect is that they make people feel safer going about their business and if they do nothing only that, sure I suppose it's something.

[Ducky]

I just feel that their becoming compulsory is more about politics than public health.

They slow the spread of a highly infectious and dangerous disease that we have no reliable preventative treatment for and it can also overwhelm the healthcare system if we allow it to go unchecked.

How on any planet is that about politics and not public health?

[Pedrito]

The point is that most people comply. People are doing their best. That said, there's a kind of criminal vibe being thrown at people who step out of line. Gatherings in houses, pubs etc etc. Now, I'm all for doing the right thing, but that 'right thing' needs to be backed up by very real numbers. I don't see any issue in questioning it. I'm still complying and doing my best, but there is a tonne of info out there about the efficacy of masks(some of which has already been included in the thrrad before anyone asks) and I don't see an issue in discussing it here on Metal Warfare which has absolutely no knock on effect in the real world.

Also, there is huge mixed messaging being put out there. Joe public is expected to abide by rules and regs and yet we continue to allow travel in and out of countries. We've seen a number of high profile figures lose their jobs recently in Ireland for literally 'breathing' and I wouldn't argue against them having lost their jobs, but, again, are the numbers supporting the measures, is it working, does the risk to economy, jobs, education outweigh the benefit. I think it's all very valid and open to 'questioning' without acting like a prick and intentionally going against all the new rules just to be a prick.

[astfgyl]

I just feel that their becoming compulsory is more about politics than public health.

They slow the spread of a highly infectious and dangerous disease that we have no reliable preventative treatment for and it can also overwhelm the healthcare system if we allow it to go unchecked.

How on any planet is that about politics and not public health?

We still talking about the cloth masks here? There is no actual proof they work, but I am willing to concede that they might make people feel safer. That is the last I will say about the efficacy of cloth masks unless some results of some sort come out to change my mind.

What I see for the most part is that it takes away the focus from other questions like what happened with the nursing homes? It's easy to turn us all against each other using something like the wearing of masks and saying the reason the cases are going back up is because we aren't behaving, like the mask protesters and those pesky kids with their house parties and having friends and family for barbecues etc, and of course that Killarney Crowd, when the evidence shows that yes, a lot of the recent clusters were private house and party related, but not a lot of deaths. In fact fuck all deaths have arisen from all of this public misbehaviour we see and hear since the lifting of restrictions, but an awful lot of deaths happened at the start after the Nursing Homes were exposed, and there is going to be a blame game to be played there soon enough. Much better if that blame was shifted on to joe public rather than forcing ministers and civil servants answer the hard questions. So there is the political element that I was on about. There are also a lot of things overwhelming the health service and currently Covid 19 isn't one of them. Lack of funding, mismanagement going back decades, years of cuts due to austerity to pay an imaginary bill, not paying nurses their due, executive salaries, the list goes on. These are the things which are crippling the health service. But sure never mind all that, look at those bollixes in Killarney.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/0831/1162379-europe-covid-cases/

[Pedrito]

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/0831/1162379-europe-covid-cases/

Definitely not an 'I told you so' but it's got to be taken into consideration. Without proper testing there's no way to say either way.

[Pedrito]

Agreed with Astfygl there. Our health service is an embarassment and the virus has potential to show just how unprepared it is, just how underfunded and mismanaged. So in that sense, so much of what is happening is absolutely political.

[Juggz]

Very high level stats. It would be interesting to see it broken down into age groups.

The World Health Organization says data to date suggests 80% of Covid-19 infections are mild or asymptomatic, 15% are severe infection, requiring oxygen and 5% are critical, requiring ventilation.

[Nazgûl]

On a complete U-turn from all the mask discussion which I've been silently following here --

Has anybody read the news yesterday about the government talks surrounding live music and events. They're considering ways to let them go ahead if alcohol is not being served.

A massive bag of worms to get into which calls for the long post. Leaving aside the feelings many seem to have (justifiably so), which is that it's yet another instance of the govt. demonising drink and the pubs and venues they're failing to support -- there are other reasons this probably won't work.

The main one being cost. With the tax excise on alcohol in Ireland (i.e. drink is expensive here), venues make practically all of their money on the bar when hosting a live gig. Take that away, and they're left with trying to break even by venue rental alone. This would mean an increase in cost for hiring the venue for promoters/artists, putting immense pressure on them them sell out the venue (which rarely happens) to break even and cover costs...and at the end of it you have nobody really getting paid anything or making a loss, especially when you factor in social distancing needs and the smaller crowd capacity. It doesn't sound sustainable at all for any party involved.

Some are arguing that most of Europe has opened their pubs and venues without much issue, where as Ireland are way behind. I get this to a certain degree, but I can't ignore the fact that it probably points to our relationship with drink over here and how our nightlife is totally centered around it. There's already been accounts of video footage showing people getting langers and losing the run of themselves. The government are obviously using these examples (and house parties) as a sticking point to not bring nightlife back any time soon, while ignoring their own shortcomings in dealing with virus spreading and outbreaks in other aspects of society (meat factories, direct provision). But I think there has to be some logic to it also, that as a nation we can't really be trusted to adhere to restrictions if everyone is oiled up every weekend.

So, I guess, I'm wondering if ANYBODY has thought of alternative ways in which gigs could go ahead? Trying to find positive/creative/alternative opinions on how people think it could be done? I reckon the restricted numbers in venues -- all sitting at tables -- with alcohol being served to their table throughout the night is the only middle ground I can think of right now.

Or, do any of ye completely disagree with my previous points above and think gigs just should be going ahead as normal, booze and all - as it appears to be in other countries.

[Juggz]

I'm going to a classical recital in the Triskel in Cork in a couple of weeks. The capacity is capped at 18 and it's a big place. For classical, where you're going to sit down and keep schtum anyway, I can see it working from a social distancing, if not a financial, perspective. For a rock or metal gig, I can't see how it works with social distancing. People act the bollox with a few jars in them and who's going to sit at tables at metal gigs?

I still can't see how 18 people in a place like the Triskel is sustainable anyway, but you've got to support what's there or it will disappear. Their cafe/snack bar will be closed, too, FWIW. It's a fucked situation.

[Nazgûl]

Yeah that's pretty dire alright. The reason I brought it up here is because there was talk about it too on the FB group Four Four, which is all electronic music heads. So obviously they're fucked too if their idea of a good night to spend it dancing until all hours. Obviously for metal gigs nobody wants to sit down either or not drink.

But to be fair, if you just took the pints away from the equation for a minute...I know it's 'no craic', but I'd certainly go to a metal or a dance gig without booze ( there's always yokes for the latter  ) if it meant seeing a good live band and show again. I could live with it for a while at least.

So let's say we could live without the pints for the time being...it opens up the potential for younger audiences to attend (whether you see that as good or bad), and at the very least it'd be interesting to see how the crowd would engage without being fucked up.

But, what I can't get around is how it would actually work financially as I mentioned.

It's just fucked as Juggz mentioned, no matter how you look at it. It's hard to see one without the other (drink and gigs) from a financial OR cultural perspective. I also wholeheartedly agree with supporting what we have right now though, no matter how different or odd it may seem.

[Ollkiller]

Was at The Bonk in the Kino 2 weeks ago. Normally holds 200, capacity reduced to 50 people at tables of between 2 and 5 people. Dimly lit with a light at each table. Turn on the light and get served. It was fucking glorious to be at a gig even though we were sitting down.

[mickO)))]

So let's say we could live without the pints for the time being...it opens up the potential for younger audiences to attend (whether you see that as good or bad), and at the very least it'd be interesting to see how the crowd would engage without being fucked up.

Didn't DME have a number of all age shows over the last decade or so I don't remember it having any significant impact on attendance. Under agers also means the insurance goes up as far as I know. No drink at shows will be a terrible idea because people will just neck cans and spirits before going into the venue and probably end up even more pissed than normal. As for drinking being centered around Irish nightlife it's the same in most countries the only reason drinking is so big in Ireland is because people really don't have a lot of other things to do.

[Blackout]

214 cases, jesus. Defo heading for lockdown.

[Nazgûl]

Ok, so if clubs/venues/bars are open in other countries right now and events able to happen without much fuss made, then I can only assume that alcohol -- or at least people who are drunk -- isn't aren't tearing the arse out of it and causing a total breakdown in social distancing and putting one another at significant risk.

So when it comes to here, I suppose I'm wondering if we should be given the same freedoms and be trusted that it won't turn into a shit show, or are the government correct in their caution and distrust surrounding drinking at gigs? There seems to be firm stances taken on both ends of the spectrum from what I'm reading online. I know I'm not adding too much by way of answers, just wondering what others thoughts are on all of this.