For how much longer do we have to wear masks in supermarkets for?

[Peter Denis]

3 minutes ago, dlclark97 said:

Wear your mask a few more months like it was insurance against getting Covid.  Maintain social distancing as well.  A small price to pay to help keep Thailand safe.  If you don't care about yourself then care about others that you could spread the disease to.  Just think, Thailand could have had a leader who, as some thought, said it was just another flu.  That leader failed to lead by example and look at the mess his country is in.  At least in Thailand most of the leadership took immediate and effective actions.

After more than 3 months with not one reported domestic case on a population of 70 million, what more is needed to admit that Thailand is virtually covid-free (I write 'virtually' because there might be some non-reported cases, which doesn't affect the conclusion covid-free one bit).

Please explain how mask-wearing and social distancing will help keep Thailand safe when there are no infectuous people in Thailand (if there were we would have had some outbreaks, and that didn't happen).

Reasoning and common sense seemingly have gone completely out of the window when the thinking is muddled by fear and mixing up covid-issues faced by other countries with the current situation in Thailand.

 

[DrTuner]

7 hours ago, Nemises said:

You should always wear a mask when out to help avoid ALL viruses from being transmitted to your nose and mouth, as all humans constantly touch their face.  

Except the single use masks are re-used million times, worn too long, etc. Would not be surprised at all if they've caused more respiratory problems than they solved, as getting moist is perfect breeding ground for bacteria.

Edited September 4, 2020 by DrTuner

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

After more than 3 months with not one reported domestic case on a population of 70 million, what more is needed to admit that Thailand is virtually covid-free (I write 'virtually' because there might be some non-reported cases, which doesn't affect the conclusion covid-free one bit).

Please explain how mask-wearing and social distancing will help keep Thailand safe when there are no infectuous people in Thailand (if there were we would have had some outbreaks, and that didn't happen).

Reasoning and common sense seemingly have gone completely out of the window when the thinking is muddled by fear and mixing up covid-issues faced by other countries with the current situation in Thailand.

 

I think it is your reasoning which is flawed. If you assume that masks and social distancing are working then you can't tell if there is a low number of infected people in Thailand but because the spreading is prevented, no real outbreak happens. The only two ways to verify this hypothesis is to A) let everyone not wear masks anymore, no more social distancing and go on as nothing happened apart from closed borders or B) do extremely widespread testing. Since both are not happening, you have no way to tell if it would be safe to just stop wearing masks.

 

In other words: IF the reason that there is no spread of the virus in Thailand can be at least partially attributed to wearing masks then that by definition is the explanation you were asking for. ONLY IFF there are no infected people whatsoever in the whole country would it not help. And I guess everyone can agree the chances for that to be the case are next to nil.

 

Now if you instead are claiming masks and social distancing are not helping then I guess that's your oppinion but for me it's obvious to see why it would help.

 

I think most people can agree though that testing in Thailand is not being performed enough. I know no one who got tested. And hence it's hard to say how much the virus is really spread out in Thailand. I've heard of plenty of people with fever that recovered after a week or two. Might have been covid, might not. None of them got tested.

[Peter Denis]

12 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

I think it is your reasoning which is flawed. If you assume that masks and social distancing are working then you can't tell if there is a low number of infected people in Thailand but because the spreading is prevented, no real outbreak happens. The only two ways to verify this hypothesis is to A) let everyone not wear masks anymore, no more social distancing and go on as nothing happened apart from closed borders or B) do extremely widespread testing. Since both are not happening, you have no way to tell if it would be safe to just stop wearing masks.

 

In other words: IF the reason that there is no spread of the virus in Thailand can be at least partially attributed to wearing masks then that by definition is the explanation you were asking for. ONLY IFF there are no infected people whatsoever in the whole country would it not help. And I guess everyone can agree the chances for that to be the case are next to nil.

 

Now if you instead are claiming masks and social distancing are not helping then I guess that's your oppinion but for me it's obvious to see why it would help.

 

I think most people can agree though that testing in Thailand is not being performed enough. I know no one who got tested. And hence it's hard to say how much the virus is really spread out in Thailand. I've heard of plenty of people with fever that recovered after a week or two. Might have been covid, might not. None of them got tested.

On the contrary, I think YOUR reasoning is flawed.

 

Following your logic, there would be no way to prove that face-masks and social distancing did NOT prevent an outbreak of covid, and THEREFOR these measures need to be continued ad infinitum.

But in reality we see that face-mask wearing and social distancing is not taking place anymore at many places in the country, and it does NOT result in any outbreaks of covid.  I leave it to you to draw the logical conclusion from that fact.

 

Re the issue of testing > According to you there is not enough testing in Thailand.  But testing only makes sense when there is a reasonable possibility that the person being tested is infected.  So this is a vicuous circle, and it would be senseless to start random testing in order to prove that Thailand is viritually covid-free when the observations in the field all support that conclusion already (no outbreaks, and no reported domestic cases for over 3 months).

 

And your last argument, plenty of people with fever that recovered after a week or two > when not serious enough to go to a hospital (where they would be tested), nor becoming a SuperSpreader and causing an outbreak in the area where they live, actually puts a couple of question-marks on this 'killer' disease < see also the attached chart which puts it somewhat into perspective >.

 

 

[mike787]

forever mate

[eisfeld]

25 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

On the contrary, I think YOUR reasoning is flawed.

 

Following your logic, there would be no way to prove that face-masks and social distancing did NOT prevent an outbreak of covid, and THEREFOR these measures need to be continued ad infinitum.

But in reality we see that face-mask wearing and social distancing is not taking place anymore at many places in the country, and it does NOT result in any outbreaks of covid.  I leave it to you to draw the logical conclusion from that fact.

 

Re the issue of testing > According to you there is not enough testing in Thailand.  But testing only makes sense when there is a reasonable possibility that the person being tested is infected.  So this is a vicuous circle, and it would be senseless to start random testing in order to prove that Thailand is viritually covid-free when the observations in the field all support that conclusion already (no outbreaks, and no reported domestic cases for over 3 months).

 

And your last argument, plenty of people with fever that recovered after a week or two > when not serious enough to go to a hospital (where they would be tested), nor becoming a SuperSpreader and causing an outbreak in the area where they live, actually puts a couple of question-marks on this 'killer' disease < see also the attached chart which puts it somewhat into perspective >.

 

I didn't say one needs to continue the measures ad infinitum. Just as long as there is reasonable cause to think that these measures are helping. You are right that face mask wearing and social distancing is not being done as much as it used to and we are not hearing of big outbreaks. But the lack of testing means we don't know if those recent changes cause more infections or not. The data is simply not there and therefor you can't draw absolute conclusions.

 

I strongly disagree with your claim that testing only makes sense if there is a reasonable possibility that the person tested is infected because how do you establish "reasonable possibility"? Random testing would provide very valueable data to draw statistical conclusions. That is not happening unfortunately. Your reasoning that "we see no outbreaks / reported cases therefor we don't need testing" is flawed in the sense that without testing of course you can't see outbreaks or reported cases. Consider that the spread of the virus is not binary as in "very big outbreak / lot's of sick people in hospital" or not but there can be plenty of less widespread outbreaks and maybe they are held back by measures like wearing masks. Note I am saying maybe. I don't have prove either way.

 

I can't follow you on your last paragraph. You can't conclude from me knowing of a few people with fever but not dieing that the virus isn't deadly.

 

Maybe your chart is right and the lethality is really low. I'm ready to believe that. And that's an argument against heavy measures but wearing a mask is such a slight inconvenience that I really can't understand people who make such a big fuss about it. If wearing a mask is such a burden than I think those folks must have an otherwise great life ????

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

no outbreaks, and no reported domestic cases for over 3 months

Just from yesterdays news btw:

 

Quote

The unnamed DJ had not been out of the country. He is 37 years old. His infection was revealed on Wednesday and announced to the public the morning after.

 

The only reason why they detected this infection was because he was arrested and they tested inmates. Had he not been arrested then noone would be aware of that outbreak, he had no symptoms. He was not out of the country so he must have gotten it from somewhere local. There is a dark number of infections and no one knows how big. True random testing with a big enough sample of the population could shine a light on that.

[DrTuner]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

But in reality we see that face-mask wearing and social distancing is not taking place anymore at many places in the country, and it does NOT result in any outbreaks of covid. 

It might result in outbreaks, but the question is will anybody notice. A few coughing people here and there and a couple of old grannies BBQ'd, on with it.

[AAArdvark]

Wearing a mask says something about you.  Not wearing a mask says even more about you.

[DrTuner]

2 minutes ago, AAArdvark said:

Wearing a mask says something about you.  Not wearing a mask says even more about you.

And wearing it under your chin says Ultra Trendy.

[Peter Denis]

7 minutes ago, AAArdvark said:

Wearing a mask says something about you.  Not wearing a mask says even more about you.

I would be interested in an Agent supported Mask. 

For a fee you would meet the Mask-wearing requirement, but don't need to wear it.