• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Covid and Work, Covid Advice and General Chat

please can you quote who you are replying to or mention their name, as its hard to follow replies which could apply to several posts.
 
Brunneria said:
Constructive debate is always useful, so if and when you do find references showing the things you claim, then I am sure they will be just as relevant as the link @ert posted in #794 above, which I, for one, read with great interest.
Click to expand...

My last point

A quote from the Lancet study you mention that @ert linked to.

"as was use of face masks (including N95 respirators or similar and surgical or similar masks [eg, 12–16-layer cotton or gauze masks]) and eye protection (eg, goggles or face shields). Added benefits are likely with even larger physical distances (eg, 2 m or more based on modelling) and might be present with N95 or similar respirators versus medical masks or similar. "

and

" Despite this step, our findings continued to support the ideas not only that masks in general are associated with a large reduction in risk of infection from SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV but also that N95 or similar respirators might be associated with a larger degree of protection from viral infection than disposable medical masks or reusable multilayer (12–16-layer) cotton masks. Nevertheless, in view of the limitations of these data, we did not rate the certainty of effect as high. Our findings accord with those of a cluster randomised trial showing a potential benefit of continuous N95 respirator use over medical masks against seasonal viral infections"

(my bolding)

Not an old t-shirt in sight...

Enjoy and farewell x.
 

yes, as I said in my last post to you, @ert’s link made an interesting read.

However, still waiting for you to produce evidence that every single study proves your general point.
Or are you saying that you are only referring to studies done on ‘grannies’ knickers’ and ‘old t shirts’?
Because I can understand if you are struggling to find reputable references on that specific subject.
 
Nothing gives 100% protection, which is 'certainty.' But even a lesser degree of protection from 'cotton masks' which could be interpreted as your t-shirt or undies, is going to be better than not wearing them or having no protection. Anyhow, I'm wearing an N95, rather than my Bonds.
 

Sadly, people rarely read past the headline. The abstract at best. Many published studies (of all types) tend to tacitly admit (at the very bottom) that they basically made it all up
 
Jim Lahey said:
Sadly, people rarely read past the headline. The abstract at best. Many published studies (of all types) tend to tacitly admit (at the very bottom) that they basically made it all up
Click to expand...
Speaking from experience? Conspiracy theory 101. I enjoy the mathematical analysis, actually, especially in the Lancet. Please list all of your stated published studies that admit they are made up at their very end. Or are you making this up as you go along?
 
Last edited:

Not looking for an argument and I'm not inclined to get into an endless tit-for-tat exchange of web links. It's an opinion, one which you are free to disagree with. My only point being that the headline, or even the abstract, very often do not actually reflect the study as a whole. In other words the headlines are often made up.
 
All

Some recent posts have been deleted for bickering and derailing this thread.

Although the OP was about returning to work in the context of Covid, the thread has consistently wandered off topic.

From this point forward it would be appreciated if:

- the topic in the OP is adhered to
- any claims are supported by links/named references
- disagreements are conducted politely and without bickering

Any posts not meeting these criteria will be deleted and may incur further sanctions.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Well just an update after my visit to the school this afternoon.

I must say that in many ways the strategies put in place are very good. One way system in place around the school leading to outside doors to classrooms to stop corridors being used as much as possible. Hand sanitizers at entrance to each classroom. No more class doors locked so no need for button codes, padlocks or dongles. Meetings, briefings and training outside if weather is good or in the Gym. Radios sanitized at end of day and mine has a label on it saying it's mine. Lunches staggered and spread about the school rather than just lunch hall. And I can stand as far away as I like from anyone else in the classroom. So as far as contamination from surfaces or close contact the risk does seem to have been potentially lowered with the alterations and guidelines put in place.

That's the good. The not so good is the fact that as it's an SEN school they apparently don't have to abide by government guidelines re PPE and masks, although it can be provided if someone requests it. It's not a surprise as Autistic children are anxious at the best of times, but considering by all accounts that will leave me as the only one wearing a mask it's concerning to say the least. Especially considering masks generally are to protect others rather than the user.

A mask and especially a visor may protect you more from a direct hit from a cough, sneeze or spit (accidental I must add) but if this thing hangs in the air as an aerosol and you are in a classroom for 45 minutes with a symptomatic, asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic individual who is unknowingly shedding viral particles then I doubt very much either mask or visor will help much!

Watching Dr John's video last night it has become apparent the highest mode of transmission seems to be from being contaminated by viral particles from an asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carrier. Interestingly the study he was talking about suggested asymptomatic transmission is lower than first thought with pre-symptomatic people being the main transmission drivers. These for those unsure are people who start off with no symptoms but develop symptoms after several days, whereas asymptomatic are people who remain contagious but do not develop any symptoms. Both can transmit the virus unknowingly.

So in a nutshell all that's going to happen is that children or staff will be told to isolate if someone in a class becomes unwell or tests positive. Like everything else in this pandemic a case of shutting the door after the horse has bolted!

The reason why the original SARS was controlled so well is that people got ill and/or died pretty quickly after infection. Not so with this little er blighter, where as above most transmit it without knowing they have it.

Lots to ponder in a week!!!

Vid is here if anyone is interested.

 
My biggest concern for a work return after the summer holidays is travel
I never stopped going into work but early on went in by car and when that became to congested travelled on the train and walked but not the tube. Next week will be crunch time as to how much ch ch trains have filled up. I have bought a stock of KN95 mask to try to make the best of a.bad situation ( some protection is better than none)
At work itself I will insist on 2m distance from others and wear mask as much as possible.
I don't really know what's best to do about my parents. My mother has Alzheimer's and my dad a range of issues that also make him extremely vunerable, both in their eighties. I think being back at work and exposed myself will mean I'm going to have leave them to cope on their own and contact only on the phone.
With 1500 new cases today I do feel we are beginning the second wave and I intend to be ahead of government measures which seem very slow to be implemented.
 
Did you read this one?
You have to read the whole article -

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30323-4/fulltext
 
As Boris exhorts everyone to return to the office, how many do you think will listen? I needed to ring a firm in the East Midlands this morning; the nice person at the other end said they reduced their office capacity to three on site, and it’s still three on site.
 
Boris is doing the same with office return to work as he did with schools ie just pronouncing that it is now safe to return. Without having the faintest idea what goes on in individual offices. The only justification for pronouncing it safe to return would be a vaccine or proven evidence that the virus has disappeared. Outright deliberate lies because he wants to help out the sandwich bars. Does he think we are morons who can't read or decide for ourselves what is safe? People will eat & drink about the same amount as they always did, just buy it from the supermarkets rather than the sandwich bars and posh coffee shops. And they will just go to dry cleaners and hairdressers etc nearer home. Businesses will still get their custom, just DIFFERENT businesses. Meanwhile the businesses they work for will continue thriving.
 
Reactions: JRT

This part of your post I agree with. Home workers will still need to eat and shop, but they will do this locally. They will spend the same amount of money, just in a different place. Home working actually works well, both for the worker and the company, and this is why people are preferring this method.
 
Interesting edition of Independent Sage today. In a nutshell the government only state it SHOULD be safe to return to work. Covid safety in all workplaces is totally down to employer with no inspections or sanctions if isnt. All the government provide are general wishes and suggestions. If environment isnt safe it's up to employees to report to HSE whose numbers have been decimated due to austerity.
Personally I think the government have just shrugged their shoulders and tried to ensure the blame is spread as far away as possible.
To do things properly take time,investment and possibly major change to working patterns. I think maybe the government feel a vaccine could be found in next year so why go to all that trouble? Meanwhile what's the problem with the lower orders getting infected? Priority is to prop up those luxury buildings in central London. Just imagine the money that will be lost if those property prices crash,a lot of it by overseas investors.
 
I don't think the Back to The Office malarkey is about caring for the jobs of the minimum wage sandwich makers.

I think it's about the landlords and owners of the office blocks.

It's not even about being back to work, which implies that many home workers are idle and workshy. Most office workers never stopped working, and are still working - from home.

I see that the benefits to the environment by not commuting are also being ignored.
 
Last edited:
I totally support people making individual choices of what is best for them.

My gripe is the attempted shaming of those for whom home working is best for them, and trying to force them to go back. Plus, I am against the promotion of the idea that people who are working from home are not really working.
 

Gosh, what a novel idea, working and socialising locally, blimey, they'll be reinventing markets and grocers next.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…