|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
Northern Ireland26688 Posts
On August 22 2021 23:15 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2021 21:01 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Everyone dies of something. Smoking, obesity, drugs, high risk behaviour generally means you get sick and die earlier. From a social point of view as long as "earlier" is past retirement age and you were able to work the health issues you get from your lifestyle is no issue and economically you are probably a net positive (especially smoking since it is also taxed very heavily).
Eliminating these risk factors would not require the need for hospital care, it would just mean you had more older people with age associated diseases instead of younger ones with life style disease.
Also more importantly the current health care system is built around handling the load of sick people our society produces and that includes smoking and obesity (it would be just as big but structured differently if no one smoked and everyone was fit).
Covid is a pandemic and not equivalent to any of these factors. First of all putting others at risk is actually produces more disease, disease which the health care system is not set up to handle from the first place.
Second covid makes you sick and take up expensive care slots. You could argue that it mainly kills older people past retirement age which could somewhat compensate economically for how expensive ICU care is but it's not that lethal and it makes a lot of people sick so obviously it's not even close to being zero sum.
It's also not a lifestyle factor you choose yourself. A high risk "covid" lifestyle with antivax threatens not just yourself but many others. Second hand smoking is not even close to being as dangerous and we still regulate the shit out of that.
Anti-vax people can cry all they want but covid is not the same thing as any of the false equivalents they bring up and it's perfectly fine for people to be both pissed off at them and for the government to impose restrictions that violate "their rights" as long as more than 51 % of the population agrees with them. Are you trying to argue that dying of smoking is less burdensome on the healthcare system than dying of COVID? Smokers with lung cancer, emphysema, COPD etc. are in and out of hospitals for years before they kick the bucket. People that die of COVID are dead within a month of contracting the disease. Hell, it's even in the names - the C in COPD stands for chronic and the A in SARS-COV-2 stands for acute. The idea that a death from an acute illness would cost more than a death from a chronic illness spits in the face of common sense so I hope you have some sources to back it up.
There will always be strains on the healthcare system, that’s what it’s there for after all.
You’re taxed out the arse for cigarettes, at least over here with the sales tax hike justification being due to those additional costs you might bring. At least within the framework of a nationalised health service, I’m unsure if smokers foot the bill with increased insurance premiums elsewhere.
Then in addition you’re more likely to check out before hitting advanced old age. Not without running up a hefty enough tab, but compared to years and years of dementia care, to take one pertinent example, you are potentially making savings for the health service vs that if you use the smoking speedrun skip.
I have seen conflicting sources on this admittedly, and variables will change from country to country.
The U.K. has both a really, really high sales tax on smoking, as well as a relatively high amount of the population that make it to advanced old age. It’s also illegal to smoke basically anywhere indoors outside of private residences, so non-smokers aren’t as subject to the behaviour of smokers that may be detrimental to their health as well.
As I said earlier, I’m not defending smoking it’s a ridiculous habit I wish I didn’t have. But smokers are both obligated to offset their impact their personal healthcare costs may bring via sales tax, as well as mitigate the effect their choices may have on others who don’t share them via restrictions on where they can smoke.
I just don’t see much commonality between smoking and not vaccinating at all, other than an example of halfway house mitigation measures for a public health issue that lie between a visit to Mohdoo IslandTM and ‘I’m not getting vaccinated and I get to do what I want’.
|
A good step - antibody testing to assess the risk of re-infection and the need for boosters (on top of gaining more insights into the virus in general).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58293249
Small side rant - there are many people here who are advocating for more action (on top of vaccination), yet somehow end up being branded or insinuated as 'anti-vaxxers' (or sympathetic to their cause). That's odd and frustrating. Makes me realise there's an opposite side of the extreme - 'only-vaxxers'.
|
On August 23 2021 01:28 RKC wrote:A good step - antibody testing to assess the risk of re-infection and the need for boosters (on top of gaining more insights into the virus in general). https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58293249Small side rant - there are many people here who are advocating for more action (on top of vaccination), yet somehow end up being branded or insinuated as 'anti-vaxxers' (or sympathetic to their cause). That's odd and frustrating. Makes me realise there's an opposite side of the extreme - 'only-vaxxers'.
People ain't being branded as pro covid just because they're advocating for heppa filters in schools or other actions to help stop the spread of covid. We brand them as pro covid because they would rather do these things than take a free option to save lives or a small inconvenience to also save lives.
They object to these things and shield their desire to not save lives by throwing out things that would require other people to do things to save lives.
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26688 Posts
On August 23 2021 01:28 RKC wrote:A good step - antibody testing to assess the risk of re-infection and the need for boosters (on top of gaining more insights into the virus in general). https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58293249Small side rant - there are many people here who are advocating for more action (on top of vaccination), yet somehow end up being branded or insinuated as 'anti-vaxxers' (or sympathetic to their cause). That's odd and frustrating. Makes me realise there's an opposite side of the extreme - 'only-vaxxers'.
There is a marked difference between believing that vaccines aren’t a magic bullet and are useful as part of a wider series of other societal measures and proposing vigilance in not losing sight of those other things, and concern trolling about not losing sight of the other things to argue against the efficacy of vaccines.
Especially given more and more exposure to a particular individuals’s arguments, the difference becomes pretty bloody obvious and the underlying intent, even if it relatively well hidden, (which usually isn’t) tends to be revealed.
The person who conceded the necessity of masks in some scenarios, or at least some benefit who voices concern that it’s all well and good but ventilation in many workplaces and schools etc also needs looked at, is obviously different from the person who was railing against masks before and pivots to ‘what’s the point in masks without good ventilation?’
I would tend to agree that there’s an extremely toxic discourse and fragmentation around all sorts of Covid issues that is extremely reductive.
|
On August 23 2021 01:12 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2021 23:15 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2021 21:01 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Everyone dies of something. Smoking, obesity, drugs, high risk behaviour generally means you get sick and die earlier. From a social point of view as long as "earlier" is past retirement age and you were able to work the health issues you get from your lifestyle is no issue and economically you are probably a net positive (especially smoking since it is also taxed very heavily).
Eliminating these risk factors would not require the need for hospital care, it would just mean you had more older people with age associated diseases instead of younger ones with life style disease.
Also more importantly the current health care system is built around handling the load of sick people our society produces and that includes smoking and obesity (it would be just as big but structured differently if no one smoked and everyone was fit).
Covid is a pandemic and not equivalent to any of these factors. First of all putting others at risk is actually produces more disease, disease which the health care system is not set up to handle from the first place.
Second covid makes you sick and take up expensive care slots. You could argue that it mainly kills older people past retirement age which could somewhat compensate economically for how expensive ICU care is but it's not that lethal and it makes a lot of people sick so obviously it's not even close to being zero sum.
It's also not a lifestyle factor you choose yourself. A high risk "covid" lifestyle with antivax threatens not just yourself but many others. Second hand smoking is not even close to being as dangerous and we still regulate the shit out of that.
Anti-vax people can cry all they want but covid is not the same thing as any of the false equivalents they bring up and it's perfectly fine for people to be both pissed off at them and for the government to impose restrictions that violate "their rights" as long as more than 51 % of the population agrees with them. Are you trying to argue that dying of smoking is less burdensome on the healthcare system than dying of COVID? Smokers with lung cancer, emphysema, COPD etc. are in and out of hospitals for years before they kick the bucket. People that die of COVID are dead within a month of contracting the disease. Hell, it's even in the names - the C in COPD stands for chronic and the A in SARS-COV-2 stands for acute. The idea that a death from an acute illness would cost more than a death from a chronic illness spits in the face of common sense so I hope you have some sources to back it up. There will always be strains on the healthcare system, that’s what it’s there for after all. You’re taxed out the arse for cigarettes, at least over here with the sales tax hike justification being due to those additional costs you might bring. At least within the framework of a nationalised health service, I’m unsure if smokers foot the bill with increased insurance premiums elsewhere. Then in addition you’re more likely to check out before hitting advanced old age. Not without running up a hefty enough tab, but compared to years and years of dementia care, to take one pertinent example, you are potentially making savings for the health service vs that if you use the smoking speedrun skip. I have seen conflicting sources on this admittedly, and variables will change from country to country. The U.K. has both a really, really high sales tax on smoking, as well as a relatively high amount of the population that make it to advanced old age. It’s also illegal to smoke basically anywhere indoors outside of private residences, so non-smokers aren’t as subject to the behaviour of smokers that may be detrimental to their health as well. As I said earlier, I’m not defending smoking it’s a ridiculous habit I wish I didn’t have. But smokers are both obligated to offset their impact their personal healthcare costs may bring via sales tax, as well as mitigate the effect their choices may have on others who don’t share them via restrictions on where they can smoke. I just don’t see much commonality between smoking and not vaccinating at all, other than an example of halfway house mitigation measures for a public health issue that lie between a visit to Mohdoo IslandTM and ‘I’m not getting vaccinated and I get to do what I want’.
The point is that if you think that dying of smoking is somehow a net positive because society saves money on providing you dementia-care or whatever than you should view view COVID as even more of a net positive. COVID causes a rapid death in people overwhelmingly of retirement age. It also spread threw nursing homes wiping out a significant % of the residents there. If you want to save money from caring for dementia patients you should really just open the door and welcome covid in... a lot cheaper than being in and out of ICUs for months with end-stage copd or lung cancer
|
On August 23 2021 11:19 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2021 01:12 WombaT wrote:On August 22 2021 23:15 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2021 21:01 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Everyone dies of something. Smoking, obesity, drugs, high risk behaviour generally means you get sick and die earlier. From a social point of view as long as "earlier" is past retirement age and you were able to work the health issues you get from your lifestyle is no issue and economically you are probably a net positive (especially smoking since it is also taxed very heavily).
Eliminating these risk factors would not require the need for hospital care, it would just mean you had more older people with age associated diseases instead of younger ones with life style disease.
Also more importantly the current health care system is built around handling the load of sick people our society produces and that includes smoking and obesity (it would be just as big but structured differently if no one smoked and everyone was fit).
Covid is a pandemic and not equivalent to any of these factors. First of all putting others at risk is actually produces more disease, disease which the health care system is not set up to handle from the first place.
Second covid makes you sick and take up expensive care slots. You could argue that it mainly kills older people past retirement age which could somewhat compensate economically for how expensive ICU care is but it's not that lethal and it makes a lot of people sick so obviously it's not even close to being zero sum.
It's also not a lifestyle factor you choose yourself. A high risk "covid" lifestyle with antivax threatens not just yourself but many others. Second hand smoking is not even close to being as dangerous and we still regulate the shit out of that.
Anti-vax people can cry all they want but covid is not the same thing as any of the false equivalents they bring up and it's perfectly fine for people to be both pissed off at them and for the government to impose restrictions that violate "their rights" as long as more than 51 % of the population agrees with them. Are you trying to argue that dying of smoking is less burdensome on the healthcare system than dying of COVID? Smokers with lung cancer, emphysema, COPD etc. are in and out of hospitals for years before they kick the bucket. People that die of COVID are dead within a month of contracting the disease. Hell, it's even in the names - the C in COPD stands for chronic and the A in SARS-COV-2 stands for acute. The idea that a death from an acute illness would cost more than a death from a chronic illness spits in the face of common sense so I hope you have some sources to back it up. There will always be strains on the healthcare system, that’s what it’s there for after all. You’re taxed out the arse for cigarettes, at least over here with the sales tax hike justification being due to those additional costs you might bring. At least within the framework of a nationalised health service, I’m unsure if smokers foot the bill with increased insurance premiums elsewhere. Then in addition you’re more likely to check out before hitting advanced old age. Not without running up a hefty enough tab, but compared to years and years of dementia care, to take one pertinent example, you are potentially making savings for the health service vs that if you use the smoking speedrun skip. I have seen conflicting sources on this admittedly, and variables will change from country to country. The U.K. has both a really, really high sales tax on smoking, as well as a relatively high amount of the population that make it to advanced old age. It’s also illegal to smoke basically anywhere indoors outside of private residences, so non-smokers aren’t as subject to the behaviour of smokers that may be detrimental to their health as well. As I said earlier, I’m not defending smoking it’s a ridiculous habit I wish I didn’t have. But smokers are both obligated to offset their impact their personal healthcare costs may bring via sales tax, as well as mitigate the effect their choices may have on others who don’t share them via restrictions on where they can smoke. I just don’t see much commonality between smoking and not vaccinating at all, other than an example of halfway house mitigation measures for a public health issue that lie between a visit to Mohdoo IslandTM and ‘I’m not getting vaccinated and I get to do what I want’. The point is that if you think that dying of smoking is somehow a net positive because society saves money on providing you dementia-care or whatever than you should view view COVID as even more of a net positive. COVID causes a rapid death in people overwhelmingly of retirement age. It also spread threw nursing homes wiping out a significant % of the residents there. If you want to save money from caring for dementia patients you should really just open the door and welcome covid in... a lot cheaper than being in and out of ICUs for months with end-stage copd or lung cancer
Why bother with Covid then? Just slip some cyanide pills in their meals and you're done with a far higher mortality rate than covid. Also far less strain on the healthcare system!
|
People here in Austria are suddenly not wearing FFP2 masks anymore, except for a few. Most are using surgical masks. I don't know what to say anymore, my frustration with our leadership (and in many other countries) is through the roof.
|
Northern Ireland26688 Posts
On August 23 2021 11:19 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2021 01:12 WombaT wrote:On August 22 2021 23:15 BlackJack wrote:On August 22 2021 21:01 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Everyone dies of something. Smoking, obesity, drugs, high risk behaviour generally means you get sick and die earlier. From a social point of view as long as "earlier" is past retirement age and you were able to work the health issues you get from your lifestyle is no issue and economically you are probably a net positive (especially smoking since it is also taxed very heavily).
Eliminating these risk factors would not require the need for hospital care, it would just mean you had more older people with age associated diseases instead of younger ones with life style disease.
Also more importantly the current health care system is built around handling the load of sick people our society produces and that includes smoking and obesity (it would be just as big but structured differently if no one smoked and everyone was fit).
Covid is a pandemic and not equivalent to any of these factors. First of all putting others at risk is actually produces more disease, disease which the health care system is not set up to handle from the first place.
Second covid makes you sick and take up expensive care slots. You could argue that it mainly kills older people past retirement age which could somewhat compensate economically for how expensive ICU care is but it's not that lethal and it makes a lot of people sick so obviously it's not even close to being zero sum.
It's also not a lifestyle factor you choose yourself. A high risk "covid" lifestyle with antivax threatens not just yourself but many others. Second hand smoking is not even close to being as dangerous and we still regulate the shit out of that.
Anti-vax people can cry all they want but covid is not the same thing as any of the false equivalents they bring up and it's perfectly fine for people to be both pissed off at them and for the government to impose restrictions that violate "their rights" as long as more than 51 % of the population agrees with them. Are you trying to argue that dying of smoking is less burdensome on the healthcare system than dying of COVID? Smokers with lung cancer, emphysema, COPD etc. are in and out of hospitals for years before they kick the bucket. People that die of COVID are dead within a month of contracting the disease. Hell, it's even in the names - the C in COPD stands for chronic and the A in SARS-COV-2 stands for acute. The idea that a death from an acute illness would cost more than a death from a chronic illness spits in the face of common sense so I hope you have some sources to back it up. There will always be strains on the healthcare system, that’s what it’s there for after all. You’re taxed out the arse for cigarettes, at least over here with the sales tax hike justification being due to those additional costs you might bring. At least within the framework of a nationalised health service, I’m unsure if smokers foot the bill with increased insurance premiums elsewhere. Then in addition you’re more likely to check out before hitting advanced old age. Not without running up a hefty enough tab, but compared to years and years of dementia care, to take one pertinent example, you are potentially making savings for the health service vs that if you use the smoking speedrun skip. I have seen conflicting sources on this admittedly, and variables will change from country to country. The U.K. has both a really, really high sales tax on smoking, as well as a relatively high amount of the population that make it to advanced old age. It’s also illegal to smoke basically anywhere indoors outside of private residences, so non-smokers aren’t as subject to the behaviour of smokers that may be detrimental to their health as well. As I said earlier, I’m not defending smoking it’s a ridiculous habit I wish I didn’t have. But smokers are both obligated to offset their impact their personal healthcare costs may bring via sales tax, as well as mitigate the effect their choices may have on others who don’t share them via restrictions on where they can smoke. I just don’t see much commonality between smoking and not vaccinating at all, other than an example of halfway house mitigation measures for a public health issue that lie between a visit to Mohdoo IslandTM and ‘I’m not getting vaccinated and I get to do what I want’. The point is that if you think that dying of smoking is somehow a net positive because society saves money on providing you dementia-care or whatever than you should view view COVID as even more of a net positive. COVID causes a rapid death in people overwhelmingly of retirement age. It also spread threw nursing homes wiping out a significant % of the residents there. If you want to save money from caring for dementia patients you should really just open the door and welcome covid in... a lot cheaper than being in and out of ICUs for months with end-stage copd or lung cancer
Well no, you could ban smoking in the name of public health and I’d have no great objection.
I’m merely objecting to a conflation of smokers and people who won’t vaccinate, not advocating Logan’s Run man.
Smokers pay shitloads of tax, largely don’t affect others due to not having the freedom to smoke indoors, albeit passive smoking is still a problem in homes/cars where people smoke however.
When there’s a ‘no vax tax’ or a curtailing of personal freedoms (the latter doesn’t seem too unlikely to me, location dependent), then yeah they’re much more comparable.
|
Northern Ireland26688 Posts
On August 23 2021 19:25 Magic Powers wrote:
People here in Austria are suddenly not wearing FFP2 masks anymore, except for a few. Most are using surgical masks. I don't know what to say anymore, my frustration with our leadership (and in many other countries) is through the roof.
Were they common before? They certainly weren’t over here, probably again due to messaging on the issue.
Things be spiking over here
Hopefully this surge can be flattened out, still doesn’t make for great reading.
|
On August 23 2021 21:06 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2021 19:25 Magic Powers wrote:
People here in Austria are suddenly not wearing FFP2 masks anymore, except for a few. Most are using surgical masks. I don't know what to say anymore, my frustration with our leadership (and in many other countries) is through the roof. Were they common before? They certainly weren’t over here, probably again due to messaging on the issue. Things be spiking over here Hopefully this surge can be flattened out, still doesn’t make for great reading.
FFP2 masks were made mandatory in Austria (back in January iirc). I didn't see a single surgical mask since then, until today when it was a very clear majority. What's more confusing is that I can't find any updates indicating a lifting of the general FFP2 mandate.
I don't understand what's giving people the idea that surgical masks are just fine. I mean sure they help, but nowhere near as much as FFP2.
Someone must've messed up somewhere.
|
On August 23 2021 21:06 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2021 19:25 Magic Powers wrote:
People here in Austria are suddenly not wearing FFP2 masks anymore, except for a few. Most are using surgical masks. I don't know what to say anymore, my frustration with our leadership (and in many other countries) is through the roof. Were they common before? They certainly weren’t over here, probably again due to messaging on the issue. Things be spiking over here Hopefully this surge can be flattened out, still doesn’t make for great reading.
In regards to the spike in Northern Ireland: apparently all of the UK is seeing a big spike, and oddly the one in England is by far the smallest. I thought the UK had renewed its lockdown back in July (except for England)? Whatever happened to that?
|
On August 23 2021 21:06 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2021 19:25 Magic Powers wrote:
People here in Austria are suddenly not wearing FFP2 masks anymore, except for a few. Most are using surgical masks. I don't know what to say anymore, my frustration with our leadership (and in many other countries) is through the roof. Were they common before? They certainly weren’t over here, probably again due to messaging on the issue.
"Nope", they were/are _mandatory_! So, yes, they were common, because you _have to_ wear them!
And I as far as I know Austria and Bavaria(Germany) are the only places in the world that did this! Not that these places did exceptionally well in contrast to areas/countries around them, that only had "normal" surgical masks or cloth masks ...
|
On August 23 2021 21:45 Geisterkarle wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2021 21:06 WombaT wrote:On August 23 2021 19:25 Magic Powers wrote:
People here in Austria are suddenly not wearing FFP2 masks anymore, except for a few. Most are using surgical masks. I don't know what to say anymore, my frustration with our leadership (and in many other countries) is through the roof. Were they common before? They certainly weren’t over here, probably again due to messaging on the issue. "Nope", they were/are _mandatory_! So, yes, they were common, because you _have to_ wear them! And I as far as I know Austria and Bavaria(Germany) are the only places in the world that did this! Not that these places did exceptionally well in contrast to areas/countries around them, that only had "normal" surgical masks or cloth masks ...
I reposted a relevant link on mask efficacy a few days ago (while you were actively participating in the discussion, so I wouldn't know why you'd overlook this, unless you don't actually care about it). It shows that FFP2 masks work quite well, and so do surgical masks.
https://tl.net/forum/general/556693-coronavirus-and-you?page=407#8135
Also, Germany and Austria are in fact doing quite a lot better than Switzerland right now (and I already have a suspicion what your reponse to that will be), when prior to the FFP2 mandate they were pretty much equal. So that would certainly not be in support of your claim.
|
Well, yeah, I especially "shit" on FFP2! because even you write "surgical masks"! So why FFP2? Those few % that they are better are _not_ taking the cake! You also have to think about the disadvantages of them:
I hope you know, it is not recommended to wear them for a longer time!? And I know from my own experience that it can be quite difficult to breath under those! Also they are quite expensive, which can be a factor for people on social benefits and stuff!
Also please don't embarrass yourself with comparing countries! It was stupid 1 1/2 years ago, it still is! Too many variables in all countries just to fixate on masks! For example, I hope you remember a few months ago, when "we" looked very envious to Switzerland, because they went skiing; and we were not allowed to do that! Would you recommend that!?
|
On August 24 2021 01:48 Geisterkarle wrote:
Well, yeah, I especially "shit" on FFP2! because even you write "surgical masks"! So why FFP2? Those few % that they are better are _not_ taking the cake!
That is incorrect, FFP2 masks very significantly outperform surgical masks.
Please cite the part of the paper that supports your claim. There must be an error in your interpretation of it.
You also have to think about the disadvantages of them:
I hope you know, it is not recommended to wear them for a longer time!? And I know from my own experience that it can be quite difficult to breath under those! Also they are quite expensive, which can be a factor for people on social benefits and stuff!
The FFP2 masks I buy from my nearby drug store are of top quality, no breathing issues, no rashes. The recommendation of not wearing them for too long also goes for surgical masks, so there's no difference there. They're also not expensive at all, especially when compared to the cost of intensive care or lost work hours. This has all been discussed extensively, so you're not touching on anything new.
Also please don't embarrass yourself with comparing countries! It was stupid 1 1/2 years ago, it still is! Too many variables in all countries just to fixate on masks! For example, I hope you remember a few months ago, when "we" looked very envious to Switzerland, because they went skiing; and we were not allowed to do that! Would you recommend that!?
I've been monitoring many different countries to get a good overall picture with many relevant details. I've been looking almost across the whole globe (with the exception of China and Africa and a few others).
Germany/Austria/Switzerland all had almost perfectly equal curves of infections and deaths all throughout 2020, and all three countries have also taken nearly identical measures. Their geographic and cultural similarities also make it a lot less likely that there are other possible biases. They're three of the most comparable countries in the whole world.
Furthermore, my argument isn't that the mask mandates have indeed caused the disparity between Germany/Austria and Switzerland. My argument is that your claim of an insignificant difference is wrong. If we were forced to draw a conclusion, it'd have to be that the FFP2 mask mandate quite likely worked and should be continued.
|
On August 24 2021 01:48 Geisterkarle wrote:
Well, yeah, I especially "shit" on FFP2! because even you write "surgical masks"! So why FFP2? Those few % that they are better are _not_ taking the cake! You also have to think about the disadvantages of them:
I hope you know, it is not recommended to wear them for a longer time!? And I know from my own experience that it can be quite difficult to breath under those! Also they are quite expensive, which can be a factor for people on social benefits and stuff!
Also please don't embarrass yourself with comparing countries! It was stupid 1 1/2 years ago, it still is! Too many variables in all countries just to fixate on masks! For example, I hope you remember a few months ago, when "we" looked very envious to Switzerland, because they went skiing; and we were not allowed to do that! Would you recommend that!?
Notice how you don't back up a single thing you said? This feels like whiny dribble. Magic did a good job at pointing out why this is ridiculous.
|
The PHC has released an analysis of the reporting issue in Florida regarding daily deaths. The reporting method has changed (for unknown reasons), so they now back correct deaths at a later date (according to the date of death), while worldometer simply adds up the reported deaths right away. This creates the impression of daily deaths rapidly declining despite infections and hospitalizations rapidly increasing. In all likelihood deaths are currently increasing just as they are in other states.
https://www.phc.health/post/florida-appears-to-have-changed-how-it-is-reporting-daily-covid-deaths
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
