@ghost-of-a-duke said
Sure. We are talking about a small minority of people who are exempt from wearing a mask. Shav has suggested one in a million. (Ridiculous of course, but let's run with that).

UK population (rounded up) 70 million. - So that's 70 people in the whole of the UK walking around without a mask (though still able to social distance, wash hands etc). Now bearing in mind ...[text shortened]... duals from going into society however it is much more likely damage will be done to their wellbeing.

First, I see no reason to "run with the one in a million" based on an offhand remark by Shav. You ignored my point that the actual wording of the guidelines is extremely vague and could apply to many individuals.

The UK has had 325,000 confirmed cases of COVID and there are various estimates of how many actual cases there are to confirmed ones, but I haven't heard any responsible ones of less than 10:1. Even with that conservative estimate, something like 5% of the UK population has already been infected with the virus and the country has been adding more than a 1000 confirmed cases a day (meaning more than 10,000 actual cases per day). https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

So the chances of a person with a mask exemption spreading the virus (if they are allowed to mingle with the public) at some point is about 100% and the chance of multiple persons doing so is probably close to the same. And bear in mind that one person spreading the disease can affect many others.

@no1marauder said



So the chances of a person with a mask exemption spreading the virus (if they are allowed to mingle with the public) at some point is about 100% and the chance of multiple persons doing so is probably close to the same. And bear in mind that one person spreading the disease can affect many others.

Why are you presuming a person without a mask has the virus? And why are you excluding other control measures?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Why are you presuming a person without a mask has the virus? And why are you excluding other control measures?

I find your ignoring of the bulk of my posts rather annoying; I gave the statistics which show that 5% of the UK population has already had the virus and that large numbers of them are still catching it every day. Maybe it is you who should explain why people who cannot wear masks are immune from those statistics; public health experts say that not wearing a mask in public spaces increases the chances of catching and spreading COVID, so using general population stats is understating the danger.

@no1marauder said
I find your ignoring of the bulk of my posts rather annoying; I gave the statistics which show that 5% of the UK population has already had the virus and that large numbers of them are still catching it every day. Maybe it is you who should explain why people who cannot wear masks are immune from those statistics; public health experts say that not wearing a mask in publi ...[text shortened]... ances of catching and spreading COVID, so using general population stats is understating the danger.

I also find it somewhat annoying you exclude other control measures (social distancing, testing, hand washing) and regard masks as some kind of magic bullet, which they are not.

And your statistics are just nonsense. The following sentence, in particular, is bordering on deranged:

"So the chances of a person with a mask exemption spreading the virus (if they are allowed to mingle with the public) at some point is about 100%..."

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I also find it somewhat annoying you exclude other control measures (social distancing, testing, hand washing) and regard masks as some kind of magic bullet, which they are not.

And your statistics are just nonsense. The following sentence, in particular, is bordering on deranged:

"So the chances of a person with a mask exemption spreading the virus (if they are allowed to mingle with the public) at some point is about 100%..."

I find your posting "deranged"; if you read my post in its entirety (which you apparently are unable to do), you'd see that sentence makes perfect sense. IF mask exemptions are allowed in a large population with a rapidly spreading infectious disease, the chances that one of the persons granted the exemption will eventually spread the disease is a near certainty.

What statistics I presented are "nonsense"? They are all from official UK public health records and from the latest estimates from other public health sources. The 10x the confirmed cases is based on numerous studies: https://www.businessinsider.com/real-number-of-coronavirus-cases-underreported-us-china-italy-2020-4

Really your posts are just another in a long line on this Forum ignoring scientific data to downplay the dangers of COVID.

@no1marauder said
I find your posting "deranged"; if you read my post in its entirety (which you apparently are unable to do), you'd see that sentence makes perfect sense. IF mask exemptions are allowed in a large population with a rapidly spreading infectious disease, the chances that one of the persons granted the exemption will eventually spread the disease is a near certainty.
...[text shortened]... just another in a long line on this Forum ignoring scientific data to downplay the dangers of COVID.

Wrap yourself in statistics all you like. (63% of people do that).

Exemptions are necessary and justified.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I concur with all these points.