riv

https://www.spiegel.de/international...3-79849ff69def

For me the link opens without any requirement to subscribe or even accept cookies.

But the gist of the article is that A] it is all speculative ~nothing is proven as to why Portugal should seem to be faring better than Spain; and
B] it lists half a dozen possible factors ( starting with Fátima ~ and Spain's lack of anywhere to compete, lol ).

macliam

Cheers.... I'm always a bit concerned at articles sating how well X is doing before the end game is known .... it's a bit like the old joke reply when asked if you've any spare change... "I don't know, I haven't lived my life yet"

Red Eric

Not the fairest of summaries and I don't think there was any pretence that it was a rigorous scientific, medical or in depth statistical analysis.

Just comparing current death rates to elsewhere and noting some of the measures taken by the PT government and when, and how responsive the public have been, with a couple of observations.

Never mind, though. Find something more to your own liking if that's not, or you can't find it in you to read it yourself.

wellinever

Looking at the figures so far, and comparing Portugal with the UK there are some interesting results.

Number of people infected in Portugal is at 1 in 562 of the population, in the UK it is 1 in 830. So on that basis the UK would look to be less infected. Forgetting hotspots but across each country.
But when you look at deaths from those infected its a very different picture.
In Portugal it is 3% of those infected dying so far.
In the UK it is 12% of those infected have died.
Is this because Portugal is a couple of weeks behind the UK, or is Portugal doing something that the UK is not??
Or are all of these figures subject to a huge degree of error?
Certainly odd results IMO

macliam

The problem with all figures being counted is that they are not necessarily equivalent samples..... for example, UK death figures don't include anyone who dies outside hospital, but apparently include people who have COVID-19 as a factor in their death, but not necessarily the primary cause. It makes any comparison a difficult task.

GeniB

I had no trouble reading it. Agree it was just an observation rather than a scientific study .The point seemed to be about actions taken or not ,and opportunities missed .Spain allowed a mass rally for instance. Portugal quickly banned all large gatherings. As we now know a single sneeze laden with virus can travel over two aisles of a supermarket in less than 7 minutes infecting all in its path and landing on every item ( and that is from a scientific study) It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see where Spain went wrong. I went shopping yesterday for the first time in over two weeks to give my ED a break. I was surprised to see virtually no one in my village wearing masks.The word of a couple of 'experts' saying leave them to the professionals.seems to have given people a false sense of security Yes of course ,do not buy precious resources that they badly need. but do make your own ,or at least cover your nose and mouth with a double layer of T-shirt material .I am sneezing all the time right now from the unprecedented amount of pollen flying around .I have quite easily made two simple masks for OH and I and we wear them when in closer contact with people in the shops. Covid 19 has morphed as was expected ,there are various strains out there now.Its a virus that wants to live,as it does very successfully in animals without killing them.Until it reaches that point however,it will continue to kill us

riv

I find the lack of interest in face masks, esp. in the UK but I gather also in Portugal ? extraordinary.

The idea that because the protection they offer is not total therefore there's no point in general wearing of them seems to me to be obviously wrong headed.

Seatbelts and airbags do not provide total protection in an accident ~but we still think they are better than not having them.

Especially given how cheap it would be to mass produce masks, and how little ( if at all ) their general wearing would interfere with economic activity ( unlike closing schools / restaurants and all the rest of it ) it must verge on criminally negligent not to advocate their universal usage and mass production to enable such.

Red Eric

Now that the DGS has changed its stance to recommending the use of "social" masks and laid down some specifications, there are apparently 200 approved companies producing them and they'll be available for sale from next week.

Ingles

I managed to get some yesterday , believe it or not from a friend who is a Optician.

Jerseygirl

as I understand it the masks aren’t to protect you from inhaling the virus...they are to stop you from spreading it.

riv

I would think they are capable ( if well designed ) of doing both.

But either function would be of some use.

There are published graphs which show that in general terms countries which have a strong tradition of facemask wearing are doing better in terms of the numbers than countries such as the UK which do not in general wear masks.

If they work in the clinical setting ( albeit imperfectly, perhaps ) why on earth would they not work ( also imperfectly ) in non clinical settings, such as supermarkets / the street and so on ?

As with seatbelts and airbags ~ they are not perfect in the achievement of their safety objective . nevertheless ' the best should not be enemy of the good ' is surely applicable here.

Red Eric

And that might possibly be because where there is a tradition of mask-wearing, those populations have also been acclimatised to distancing and to the correct application of masks and that masks have been made available to them, as opposed to being non-existent or in extremely short supply.

Because of a lack of awareness about how to properly fit them and because of a possible false assumption that the mask in affords greater protection than it does to the wearer, thus inducing more likelihood of risk-taking behaviour, as opposed to the non mask wearer, who might be more inclined to be ultra cautious.

We appear to be on the cusp of a change here in Portugal, with the likely easing of measures from the beginning of May. During this current phase, the wearing of masks becomes recommended and they become available in numbers to the general public. It looks quite a strong possibility to me that obligatory mask-wearing in confined public or work spaces might become the norm with the easing of restrictions, but with the primary emphasis still on good hygiene and distancing.

Ingles

Well it's a start
May 4 :- Hairdressers' will be open at 10.00, but you must wear a mask
Great ,I'm about one week away from having a "mullet"

riv

If you were a hairdresser / barber / bus driver / checkout operator dealing with perhaps a hundred or more different individuals each week, would you not much rather they were ALL wearing facemasks ( and yes, the better the quality / effectiveness of the mask the better ) rather than none or just a few ? Such individuals are massively at risk, perhaps not to quite the same extent as staff in hospitals, but much more at risk than those of us who are not obliged to be in close proximity to huge numbers of persons each week.

And would you not rather that there was a law which required such mask wearing, rather than it being something which would then be for the barber / hairdresser to request / require ?

The evidence of the numbers from countries where facemask wearing has been imposed is highly probative of the fact that they do make a difference in reducing spread and deaths.

Combined with common sense : you do not need to be a trained scientist to be able to comprehend that if the virus is spread via people's breathing out through mouth and nose then those viral particles will travel less far if impeded by a mask than they will if not so impeded. And that's even before anyone starts sneezing.

Red Eric

As Ingles posted, it will be mandatory as of Monday, when the State of Emergency is lifted, to wear a mask when on public transport, in business premises, schools and other enclosed public spaces.

That will be a legal obligation, sanctionable (at least as far as public transport is concerned) with fines of between 120 and 350 euros for non-compliance.