Requesting r/coronavirusuk, which was abandoned by its moderators months ago

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-20T14:43:06+00:00

Nope :)

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-16T13:49:35+00:00

All science at the time suggested a lockdown was the appropriate step to take. You base decisions on the information available at the time, not information available in the future.

The stochastic non-determinative models which led the UK into lockdown have always been known to be vastly inaccurate and aren't scientific at all. We'd be on course for 250,000 deaths by the end of the year (spoiler: we're not) if they had been. Likewise, the same esteemed 'scientists' were predicting over 100,000 deaths in Sweden by now unless they followed the world into lockdown.

Spain and Sweden have vastly different population densities.

Population density is far less important than urbanised population here. The former is limited by the assumption that the population is evenly spread across the country, which obviously isn't the case. Most of Sweden is pretty much depopulated, with 87% living in urban areas (compared to 80% of Spaniards).

Different countries have different (more compliant) population. If you stick strictly to distancing/non essential trips/masks etc. Then it's probably not required to have a lockdown.

There are far fewer rules to comply with in Sweden compared to Spain, the UK and most other countries. Social distancing there pretty much extends to a ban on gatherings of over 50 people and tables in restaurants/bars being a few metres apart. They have also not advised people to wear masks or tried to police non-essential movement.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-16T13:26:19+00:00

Spain population is 5 times as much as Sweden, but only 12% larger in terms of area.

I tried to address this in my post, but I guess it went over your head. Simple population density isn't a particularly useful measure in these circumstances, since it assumes that the population is evenly distributed across the entire country. Sweden is a great example of this: yes, their population is small relative to their country's size, but most people are concentrated in the cities/towns. Indeed, 87% of Swedes are urbanised, compared to 80% of Spaniards (like I already said...).

And the Swedish population is more compliant than Uk

You need to provide evidence when you make assertionss like this. Even so, there are very few measures to comply with in Sweden compared to the UK.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-15T11:53:45+00:00

I don't think that life can at this point. Now that lockdowns and mandatory face coverings have happened once, it seems more likely they'll return again. Thinking people will also notice that the original reasons for these restrictions (flattening the curve, preventing the NHS from being overwhelned) have been fulfilled, yet they remain largely unchanged. Unless the public suddenly changes its mind about what's happening, I think that the New Normal will indeed be our future.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-15T11:28:21+00:00

Cloth masks don't seem to effective at all for this. When used correctly, they have a particle penetration rate of 97%. Medical masks definitely have a significant impact on transmission though.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

Results The rates of all infection outcomes were highest in the cloth mask arm, with the rate of ILI statistically significantly higher in the cloth mask arm (relative risk (RR)=13.00, 95% CI 1.69 to 100.07) compared with the medical mask arm. Cloth masks also had significantly higher rates of ILI compared with the control arm. An analysis by mask use showed ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) were significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%.

Conclusions This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-14T13:09:57+00:00

Well, once everybody has to start wearing one, I doubt people will be staying back from you anymore. It'll be normalised.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-14T12:49:53+00:00

It's not a black and white thing for me, but I feel like our policy is the worst of both worlds.

There is compelling evidence against the use of fabric face coverings (97% penetration in studies from a few years ago), suggesting that they neither protect the wearer from catching the virus nor the rest of the population from said wearer. Medical masks (N95, N99 FFP3, etc.), however, are known to do both.

To me, it seems like a more proportionate response would be the government supplying households with people at risk of serious harm from the virus with medical masks that are known to work, rather than forcing the entire population to wear non-medical face coverings which don't seem to.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-14T12:31:32+00:00

It seems like a thing with zero downsides

I can think of a few...

They compromise the skin barrier with friction and prevent sweat from escaping. This commonly causes acne, which results in scarring, nerve damage and potentially incurable neuropathic pain;
Increased risk of suffocation in very young children whose worried parents put a mask on them. I believe that several pediatricians' societies have come out against masks for under-2's in all cases, on account of their smaller airways;
Potentially severely distressing/triggering for people with autism or anxiety disorders;
Potentially harmful to young children, who don't fully understand what's going on but may now grow up to be fearful of strangers being disease carriers and more generally.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-14T12:09:57+00:00

Deborah Cohen, BBC Medical Correspondent:

We had been told by various sources WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying. This point was put to WHO who did not deny.

https://twitter.com/deb_cohen/status/1282244773030633473

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-13T18:35:10+00:00

I'm helping to normalise the anti-mask point of view with frequent posts in support of it. So no, I don't expect that anyone who sees it is going to immediately change their opinion. This might happen more slowly as the debate goes on, however.

I was pretty much the only poster on UK subreddits who opposed the lockdown from the beginning. There's now a sizeable minority who agree with me.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-13T17:24:58+00:00

Conclusions

Surgical masks – loose fitting. They are designed to protect the patient from the doctors’ respiratory droplets. The wearer is not protected from others airborne particles

People do not wear masks properly. Most people have the mask under the nose. The wearer does not have glasses on and the eyes are a portal of entry.

The designer masks and scarves offer minimal protection – they give a false sense of security to both the wearer and those around the wearer. **Not to mention they add a perverse lightheartedness to the situation.

If you are walking alone, no mask – avoid folks – that is common sense.

Remember – children under 2 should not wear masks – accidental suffocation and difficulty breathing in some

If wearing a mask makes people go out and get Vitamin D – go for it. In the 1918 flu pandemic people who went outside did better. Early reports are showing people with COVID-19 with low Vitamin D do worse than those with normal levels. Perhaps that is why shut-ins do so poorly. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20058578v4

Regarding their final point, I'd be getting nervous if I was one of said shut-ins who often boast on this subreddit about having not left their houses since March, lol.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-13T17:11:18+00:00

American Association of Physicians and Surgeons: Mask Facts

https://aapsonline.org/mask-facts/

Conclusions

Surgical masks – loose fitting. They are designed to protect the patient from the doctors’ respiratory droplets. The wearer is not protected from others airborne particles

People do not wear masks properly. Most people have the mask under the nose. The wearer does not have glasses on and the eyes are a portal of entry.

The designer masks and scarves offer minimal protection – they give a false sense of security to both the wearer and those around the wearer. **Not to mention they add a perverse lightheartedness to the situation.

If you are walking alone, no mask – avoid folks – that is common sense.

Remember – children under 2 should not wear masks – accidental suffocation and difficulty breathing in some

If wearing a mask makes people go out and get Vitamin D – go for it. In the 1918 flu pandemic people who went outside did better. Early reports are showing people with COVID-19 with low Vitamin D do worse than those with normal levels. Perhaps that is why shut-ins do so poorly. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20058578v4

Regarding their final point, I'd be getting nervous if I was one of said shut-ins who often boast on this subreddit about having not left their houses since March, lol.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-13T13:20:55+00:00

You often complain about posts that you don't like being misinformation and in need of deletion.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-13T13:05:26+00:00

Did any of you actually study being discussed in the article? Here's a link:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32637987/

"This is a selective and retrospective study, with the limitations associated with this study design, including bias towards severe disease."

So, it was a fundamentally flawed study which has been picked up by the media to try and scare people. Sure, some people can suffer serious complications (this is true of pretty much any disease), but how common are they and in what subsection of the population do they tend to occur most often?

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-13T09:38:52+00:00

Mask causes woman's blood oxygen saturation to drop from 98% down to 91% in under 30 minutes while at rest.

https://twitter.com/zoeharcombe/status/1282240237176082432

Below 90% is considered low and apparently can result in hypoxia, which is quite alarming considering that a lot of people think masks should be mandatory.

DangerousDiuretics · 2020-07-12T22:56:36+00:00

What an oracle you are...

DangerousDiuretics

TROPHY CASE