The Netherlands, The land of no masks

[TSwizzle]

This won't be received well by the authoritarians and anti-science propagandists;

For while 120 countries in the world, including much of Europe, have ordered citizens to wear masks in public places to prevent the spread of Covid-19, the Dutch are doing things differently. The nation's top scientists, having examined key data and research, have declared there is no firm evidence to back the use of face coverings. Indeed, they argue that wearing the wretched things may actually hamper the fight against disease. 'Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,' said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. 'There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.'

DailyMail

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Anti-science? So you cite one group of professionals that you want to agree with, while ignoring the other professionals saying to wear masks when too close to other people. Both groups say 6 ft distance.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Talk about cherry picking!

A vast number of places say masks. One doesn't and you pick that one.

That's not how science works.

 

[Treedbear]

I tried to find anything that added some level of intelligence to the story and only found this:

"Face masks are ‘NOT necessary’ and could even harm the fight against coronavirus, say Holland’s top scientists"

Speaking on Wednesday, after a meeting with health experts and mayors, Dutch Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark said: “From a medical point of view, there is no evidence of a medical effect of wearing face masks, so we decided not to impose a national obligation.”

Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, added: “Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence. There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.”

Holland’s position is based on assessments by the Outbreak Management Team, a group of experts advising the government.

It first ruled against masks in May and has re-evaluated the evidence several times, including again last week.

However Dutch residents must still wear face coverings on public transport.

Christian Hoebe, a professor of infectious diseases in Maastricht and member of the advisory team, said: “Face masks should not be seen as a magic bullet that halts the spread.

“The evidence for them is contradictory. In general, we think you must be careful with face masks because they can give a false sense of security. People think they’re immune from disease or stop social distancing. That is very negative.”

So apparently the Dutch really do have a problem with authority figures in that they insist on taking any advise they receive as a perfect and immutable solution that will protect them from any harm. No need to think about or integrate that advice into their general formula for well being. If you insist on living life as if it was a fairy tale I suggest it's more like Beowolf than Rumpelstiltskin.

 

[southernhybrid]

I wonder why most of my European friends online have said not to believe anything that's in the "Daily Mail". I do think it's better to get one's information from a medical website, so here you go.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-mask/art-20485449

Can face masks help slow the spread of the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) that causes COVID-19? Yes, face masks combined with other preventive measures, such as frequent hand-washing and social distancing, help slow the spread of the virus.

So why weren't face masks recommended at the start of the pandemic? At that time, experts didn't know the extent to which people with COVID-19 could spread the virus before symptoms appeared. Nor was it known that some people have COVID-19 but don't have any symptoms. Both groups can unknowingly spread the virus to others.

These discoveries led public health groups to do an about-face on face masks. The World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now include face masks in their recommendations for slowing the spread of the virus. The CDC recommends cloth face masks for the public and not the surgical and N95 masks needed by health care providers.

I think I trust the advice of the Mayo Clinic, the CDC and The WHO over the Daily Mail. The Swedes didn't follow the quidelines and they have had more cases of COVID statistically then any of the neighboring countries. And that idiot Herman Cain attended the Trump rally without wearing a mask or social distancing. He ended up dead from COVID. A friend of mine lost her father in law to the virus. He got it from his pastor after attending a church service without wearing a mask or social distancing.

And let me share a conversation that my husband had with his idiot brother who is also a dentist. They argued about the usage of masks, as the dentist Trump supporter has been running around eating in restaurants, shopping and having his new young girlfriend stay with him most nights. He said that masks don't work. So, my husband asked him if he wears a mask when he's caring for his patients. He said of course he does. So, my husband asked him why he wears the mask while caring for his patients. He answered, "Because I don't want to infect my patients." Okay. Then he went on a rant about how people don't use masks properly. That may be very true in some cases, but not wearing a mask properly doesn't mean that wearing a mask correctly doesn't help decrease the spread of the virus. If dentists, doctors and nurses wear masks to protect themselves and their patients, why shouldn't we all follow the science and do our best to wear our masks properly?

Of course, masks alone aren't the only thing we should do. We still need to keep our distance from others when shopping, and wash our hands correctly after touching potentially infected surfaces. It's not that difficult to wear a mask properly and follow the guidelines offered by medical professionals. I honestly don't understand the resistance to doing something so easy. No one is taking your rights away. You are just being asked to be a responsible citizen. WTF!

I am happy to say that everyone was wearing a mask yesterday morning when we went to the grocery store. People were acting more respectful of each other, by trying to maintain their distance. Until recently, this was rare in Georgia and now Georgia is in the top five states for viral spread. I wonder if it has anything do to with the poor leadership that is coming from our idiot governor!

 

[TSwizzle]

I honestly don't understand the resistance to doing something so easy. No one is taking your rights away. You are just being asked to be a responsible citizen. WTF!

Because, as has been pointed out, there is no clear empirical evidence that wearing a face mask provides adequate protection. It is unnatural and uncomfortable to wear a face mask and people just don't want to wear them. Nobody is stopping you wearing a face mask. So if people can mind their own business about that, why don't you give them the same courtesy and mind your own business ? Or just stay home.

 

[Bomb#20]

I honestly don't understand the resistance to doing something so easy. No one is taking your rights away. You are just being asked to be a responsible citizen. WTF!

Because, as has been pointed out, there is no clear empirical evidence that wearing a face mask provides adequate protection. It is unnatural and uncomfortable to wear a face mask and people just don't want to wear them. Nobody is stopping you wearing a face mask. So if people can mind their own business about that, why don't you give them the same courtesy and mind your own business ? Or just stay home.

That's civilian thinking. We're in a military situation. The viruses are an enemy air force, they're attacking our country, and they're seeking out targets. Face masks are to viruses as blackouts are to bombers.

If you leave your lights on during the air raid there's probably only a one in a thousand chance that a bomber crew will spot it and drop a bomb on you; but if a thousand people leave their lights on during the blackout the enemy will know when they're over the city and more people will get bombed. And if you leave your mask off during the epidemic there's probably only a one in a thousand chance that you're unknowingly infected and will drop viruses on the guy in front of you; but if a thousand people leave their masks off during the epidemic then somebody is going to get infected who wouldn't have, the virus's R0 number will go up and more people will get sick.

So when the air defense marshal tells everyone in the city to turn off the lights when the sun goes down, do we say turned off lights don't provide adequate protection from bombs? They don't. Do we say it's uncomfortable to be in the dark? It is. Do we say people just don't want to? People don't. Do we say nobody is stopping you from blacking out your house? Nobody is. Do we say if I can mind my business about your house's lights, why don't you give me the same courtesy and mind your business about my house's lights? You could. All those things are perfectly true. But no, that's not what we say. All that is civilian thinking. We're in a military situation. So we turn the damn lights off.

 

[TSwizzle]

That's civilian thinking. We're in a military situation. The viruses are an enemy air force, they're attacking our country, and they're seeking out targets. Face masks are to viruses as blackouts are to bombers.{snip absurd}

A virus is not an enemy air force, and can no more "seek out targets" than pigs can fly.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I honestly don't understand the resistance to doing something so easy. No one is taking your rights away. You are just being asked to be a responsible citizen. WTF!

Because, as has been pointed out, there is no clear empirical evidence that wearing a face mask provides adequate protection. It is unnatural and uncomfortable to wear a face mask and people just don't want to wear them. Nobody is stopping you wearing a face mask. So if people can mind their own business about that, why don't you give them the same courtesy and mind your own business ? Or just stay home.

There is no study demonstrating the effectiveness of parachutes in jumping out of airplanes. Furthermore, there is a highly credible study (published in the BMJ at that) showing they are of no benefit. #RejectTheParachute

Show

I'm not kidding about the study--it was really making a point about studying the right things. They were jumping from a small plane parked on the grass.

 

[Bomb#20]

A virus is not an enemy air force, and can no more "seek out targets" than pigs can fly.

It's a metaphor. They might as well be an enemy air force -- they're airborne, they can kill as many of us as bombers, and effectively defending ourselves requires coordinated action. And they might as well be seeking out targets -- they're undergoing natural selection in favor of any characteristic that makes them more successful at finding targets.

 

[Treedbear]

A virus is not an enemy air force, and can no more "seek out targets" than pigs can fly.

It's a metaphor. They might as well be an enemy air force -- they're airborne, they can kill as many of us as bombers, and effectively defending ourselves requires coordinated action. And they might as well be seeking out targets -- they're undergoing natural selection in favor of any characteristic that makes them more successful at finding targets.

The virus will find our weakest, most vulnerable trait and exploit it to the fullest. So far it looks like that's the stubborn refusal of one political party to value the health and well being of the their neighbors as something that benefits everyone.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

I honestly don't understand the resistance to doing something so easy. No one is taking your rights away. You are just being asked to be a responsible citizen. WTF!

Because, as has been pointed out, there is no clear empirical evidence that wearing a face mask provides adequate protection. It is unnatural and uncomfortable to wear a face mask and people just don't want to wear them. Nobody is stopping you wearing a face mask. So if people can mind their own business about that, why don't you give them the same courtesy and mind your own business ? Or just stay home.

That's civilian thinking. We're in a military situation. The viruses are an enemy air force, they're attacking our country, and they're seeking out targets. Face masks are to viruses as blackouts are to bombers.

If you leave your lights on during the air raid there's probably only a one in a thousand chance that a bomber crew will spot it and drop a bomb on you; but if a thousand people leave their lights on during the blackout the enemy will know when they're over the city and more people will get bombed. And if you leave your mask off during the epidemic there's probably only a one in a thousand chance that you're unknowingly infected and will drop viruses on the guy in front of you; but if a thousand people leave their masks off during the epidemic then somebody is going to get infected who wouldn't have, the virus's R0 number will go up and more people will get sick.

So when the air defense marshal tells everyone in the city to turn off the lights when the sun goes down, do we say turned off lights don't provide adequate protection from bombs? They don't. Do we say it's uncomfortable to be in the dark? It is. Do we say people just don't want to? People don't. Do we say nobody is stopping you from blacking out your house? Nobody is. Do we say if I can mind my business about your house's lights, why don't you give me the same courtesy and mind your business about my house's lights? You could. All those things are perfectly true. But no, that's not what we say. All that is civilian thinking. We're in a military situation. So we turn the damn lights off.

So few people are talking about the whys and wherefores.

When the virus was new our gov't didn't suggest the use of masks. The vast majority of strangers you encountered were unlikely to carry the virus and the 1.5m distancing was expected to foil virus transmission. At that time most cases were being brought into the country or transmitted under circumstances that community adoption of masks wouldn't affect. (Idiot and untrained quarantine guards and other people in frequent contact with those affected)

Now, we have spreading cases of unexplained community transmission and the gov't is asking people to wear them, because the circumstances warrant it.

In a place like the US, relatively densely populated and with large numbers of cases, it was criminal for your gov't not to encourage this measure and equally criminal (and stupid) for individuals not to do everything they can to limit the spread.

If you carry it, the virus is likely to be halted by the filtering effect of the mask and be unable to cross the 1.5 meters that responsible people are maintaining. You will prevent others getting it and potentially save the lives that would be lost in the domino effect f the chain you start.

If you don't have it, you might be a little uncomfortable. You WILL derive some small, but not infallible, benefit from the filtering of any viruses that can cross that 1.5m.

How has this become a political issue? Why would anyone resist the wearing of masks? The US has in the region of 150,000 DEATHS.

 

[TSwizzle]

A virus is not an enemy air force, and can no more "seek out targets" than pigs can fly.

It's a metaphor. They might as well be an enemy air force -- they're airborne, they can kill as many of us as bombers, and effectively defending ourselves requires coordinated action. And they might as well be seeking out targets -- they're undergoing natural selection in favor of any characteristic that makes them more successful at finding targets.

It's a crap metaphor and falls into the anti science, silly memes passed around Facebook and here.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A virus is not an enemy air force, and can no more "seek out targets" than pigs can fly.

It's a metaphor. They might as well be an enemy air force -- they're airborne, they can kill as many of us as bombers, and effectively defending ourselves requires coordinated action. And they might as well be seeking out targets -- they're undergoing natural selection in favor of any characteristic that makes them more successful at finding targets.

It's a crap metaphor and falls into the anti science, silly memes passed around Facebook and here.

Yeah, but you still seem to be very carefully picking which medical / pandemic experts you are listening to and which ones you view with scorn, based purely on your partisan position, amazing the right-wing is so far gone, that biology and disease has become partisan.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's a crap metaphor and falls into the anti science, silly memes passed around Facebook and here.

Yeah, but you still seem to be very carefully picking which medical / pandemic experts you are listening to and which ones you view with scorn, based purely on your partisan position, amazing the right-wing is so far gone, that biology and disease has become partisan.

You should have put quotes around expert.

 

[Politesse]

This won't be received well by the authoritarians and anti-science propagandists;

For while 120 countries in the world, including much of Europe, have ordered citizens to wear masks in public places to prevent the spread of Covid-19, the Dutch are doing things differently. The nation's top scientists, having examined key data and research, have declared there is no firm evidence to back the use of face coverings. Indeed, they argue that wearing the wretched things may actually hamper the fight against disease. 'Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,' said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. 'There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.'

DailyMail

So you endorse the Dutch response in its totality? Or do you only endorse one element of their overall plan? Would you support in its totality a strict "1.5 meter economy model" of COVID-19 response in California as per the current response doctrine in the Netherlands?

 

[TSwizzle]

So you endorse the Dutch response in its totality? Or do you only endorse one element of their overall plan? Would you support in its totality a strict "1.5 meter economy model" of COVID-19 response in California as per the current response doctrine in the Netherlands?

I don't agree with the California (state/county/city) arbitrarily mandating that masks are compulsory under all circumstances, particularly since there is no strong evidence that masks "save lives" or "slow the spread" (changed from "flatten the curve") etc. It should be an advisory at best and if businesses want to ban people from their stores for not wearing masks, that's fine too. My main objection is to the compulsory mask wearing outside. And of course the busybodies that "can't see why people don't conform and just wear a mask". The 6' or 1.5 meter staying apart is just another arbitrary diktat, not based on science. (Really you need to be about 20' apart to be safe from a coughing/sneezing virus carrier) I don't really care about that either, do it or don't but again it should be advisory.

 

[Politesse]

So you endorse the Dutch response in its totality? Or do you only endorse one element of their overall plan? Would you support in its totality a strict "1.5 meter economy model" of COVID-19 response in California as per the current response doctrine in the Netherlands?

I don't agree with the California (state/county/city) arbitrarily mandating that masks are compulsory under all circumstances, particularly since there is no strong evidence that masks "save lives" or "slow the spread" (changed from "flatten the curve") etc. It should be an advisory at best and if businesses want to ban people from their stores for not wearing masks, that's fine too. My main objection is to the compulsory mask wearing outside. And of course the busybodies that "can't see why people don't conform and just wear a mask". The 6' or 1.5 meter staying apart is just another arbitrary diktat, not based on science. (Really you need to be about 20' apart to be safe from a coughing/sneezing virus carrier) I don't really care about that either, do it or don't but again it should be advisory.

So, the Netherlands are a relevant source of authority we should all respect, when backing you up on the one issue in which you agree with their response, but irrelevant and not a good example for policy to follow where all of their other requirements are concerned.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I honestly don't understand the resistance to doing something so easy. No one is taking your rights away. You are just being asked to be a responsible citizen. WTF!

Because, as has been pointed out, there is no clear empirical evidence that wearing a face mask provides adequate protection. It is unnatural and uncomfortable to wear a face mask and people just don't want to wear them. Nobody is stopping you wearing a face mask. So if people can mind their own business about that, why don't you give them the same courtesy and mind your own business ? Or just stay home.

Yes, there is very clear evidence that masks work to dampen the spread of covid:

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/4...s-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

 

[Harry Bosch]

So you endorse the Dutch response in its totality? Or do you only endorse one element of their overall plan? Would you support in its totality a strict "1.5 meter economy model" of COVID-19 response in California as per the current response doctrine in the Netherlands?

I don't agree with the California (state/county/city) arbitrarily mandating that masks are compulsory under all circumstances, particularly since there is no strong evidence that masks "save lives" or "slow the spread" (changed from "flatten the curve") etc. It should be an advisory at best and if businesses want to ban people from their stores for not wearing masks, that's fine too. My main objection is to the compulsory mask wearing outside. And of course the busybodies that "can't see why people don't conform and just wear a mask". The 6' or 1.5 meter staying apart is just another arbitrary diktat, not based on science. (Really you need to be about 20' apart to be safe from a coughing/sneezing virus carrier) I don't really care about that either, do it or don't but again it should be advisory.

You are incorrect. It's very much based on science. COVID is not spread from coughing or sneezing. Covid is in our lungs. As we expel breath, covid particles are expelled out. I personally know an engineering firm that demonstrated this fact using spectrum detectors (I'm not a medical scientist obviously). Wearing a mask decreases the amount of covid that is spread around us naturally.