Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[COYBL25]

If they settle on a hand, and that hand can be covered by a glove, then that's potentially stopping someone being infected by transference. In a supermarket the option would be there for hand hygiene to avoid the need for that, outside that - say on public transport - that option wont always be there between major stations.

I grant you, it's a pretty niche circumstance, but the issue here in today's schooling of Brennan has all been about belt and braces...if one poster feels he's contributing in some way to stop the transmission of the virus, why discourage it? Why discourage that cautious mind set? In my experience, the same people who'd denounce glove wearing are the same people who wouldn't countenance wearing a face mask. These people are arguing from a selfish 'civil liberty' perspective in many cases.

lol

There`s NO difference between the virus settling on a hand or a disposable glove what so ever.

If the hand or glove then comes into contact with someone else or a suitable surface the virus is then transferred to that person or surface.

If the wearer of the glove then removes and disposes of the glove correctly and sanitises their hands properly / every surface they have touched - just the same as someone who has the virus on their hands, the chance of transference are reduced significantly.

Stop waffling, the hole is just getting bigger.


Bed.

 

[Blues Harp]

Presume that depends on who their advisors were. Is Whitty etc a political appointee?

Tbh think personality could make just as much difference as party affiliation - for instance I think any other Republican president would have handled things differently than Trump has.

He is just deflecting....But....But....But.... Corbyn/something/communist etc etc

 

[Joey66]

lol

There`s NO difference between the virus settling on a hand or a disposable glove what so ever.

If the hand or glove then comes into contact with someone else or a suitable surface the virus is then transferred to that person or surface.

If the wearer of the glove then removes and disposes of the glove correctly and sanitises their hands properly / every surface they have touched - just the same as someone who has the virus on their hands, the chance of transference are reduced significantly.

Stop waffling.
BG

Bed.

Or when this Covid 19 is hopefully over ask your GP to test your prostrate without any gloves
I can guess his reply lol

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Jebus_lives]

You can say that hands are only as good as the amount of times you wash them - it's essentially the same point as saying that gloves are not a failsafe.

Where we came in: one poster told another to leave their hands exposed in a supermarket. Period. The exchange pretty much took on an ugly tone from that bald, unqualified declaration.

I may have misunderstood here, but aren't you saying that gloves are better?

If your hands come into contact with it it's exising on that surface and can be transmitted just as easily as by wearing gloves. So logically, unless you're going to clean or dispose of your gloves at every opportunity, it's no different to just using your hands.

Which is why the advice is to wash your hands rather than effectively waste gloves that provide no greater protection.

 

[peteblue]

You do understand that early lock down, fewer cases and less spread of the virus means the country opens up again sooner? Plenty of epidemiologists and virologists were looking in horror at China, then at Italy and witnessed the successes of other countries.
Ample time, an Island with easily controllable borders, and witnessed it travelling from East to West.... is the penny dropping yet?

Well first of all, I’d be careful with whom you wish to practice condescension. But tell me, a mere engineering sort, are you an epidemiologist or a virologist ?....

Apologies, have just seen your other post saying that you were not an epidemiologist.....

 

[Jebus_lives]

If they settle on a hand, and that hand can be covered by a glove, then that's potentially stopping someone being infected by transference. In a supermarket the option would be there for hand hygiene to avoid the need for that, outside that - say on public transport - that option wont always be there between major stations.

I grant you, it's a pretty niche circumstance, but the issue here in today's schooling of Brennan has all been about belt and braces...if one poster feels he's contributing in some way to stop the transmission of the virus, why discourage it? Why discourage that cautious mind set? In my experience, the same people who'd denounce glove wearing are the same people who wouldn't countenance wearing a face mask. These people are arguing from a selfish 'civil liberty' perspective in many cases.

How?

 

[Jebus_lives]

Well first of all, I’d be careful with whom you wish to practice condescension. But tell me, a mere engineering sort, are you an epidemiologist or a virologist ?....

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

'come at the king, you best not miss'

I cannot wait for the reply to this then Pete slink away into the night.

 

[LinekersLegs]

‘How Could the CDC Make That Mistake?’

The government’s disease-fighting agency is conflating viral and antibody tests, compromising a few crucial metrics that governors depend on to reopen their economies. Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas, and other states are doing the same.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[RAFUH]

Like stages of grief, there are stages of a pandemic.

I am currently at the “I hate people” stage

 

[Barnfred 55]

It helps when you have been in lockdown.... lol

Sorry mate. Only joking. Didn't mean to upset you

 

[davek]

I may have misunderstood here, but aren't you saying that gloves are better?

If your hands come into contact with it it's exists on that surface and can be transmitted just as easily as by wearing gloves. So logically, unless you're going to clean or dispose of your gloves at every opportunity, it's no different to just using your hands.

Which is why the advice is to wash your hands rather than effectively waste gloves that provide no greater protection.

No.

@Nymzee was underscoring how cautious he is at a supermarket. His post was that he was being cautious on behalf of others, not necessarily himself:

Well if it's on my hands inside a glove then it doesn't end up anywhere in the store.

I stated he was rightly taking a cautious attitude. If gloves are no better, as good or worse than bare hands, then that's an entirely different matter. Almost a side issue to another poster pouring cold water on someone attempting to be cautious. I dunno, maybe it's just me, but I'd prefer to have caution in the middle of a pandemic rather than some mush telling everyone they have 'no common sense' in trying to be selfless and to just carry on like it was a normal situation.

 

[peteblue]

Like stages of grief, there are stages of a pandemic.

I am currently at the “I hate people” stage

Indeed, and you can see quite a few of the stages displayed within these posts....

 

[Nymzee]

UK's pub gardens could host distanced drinking from 4 July, says trade body

More than half of pubs have outside space and these should be first to reopen, says BBPA

www.theguardian.com

 

[COYBL25]

How?

There isn’t at all, but he’s desperately trying to deflect the fact he’s had his arse handed to him on a plate ( again )