English Chess Forum

J T Melsom wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 26, 2021 8:30 pm

John,

I found this article which may be the sort of thing Nick has in mind given UCL is cited. https://unherd.com/2020/07/our-universi ... -on-china/. Nick's conclusions are of course his own.

Many thanks for locating this article, which I found interesting.

I don't wish to derail this thread, but it's also true that many of our leading boarding schools have been recruiting some of their pupils from China (the numbers have dropped off recently of course) but I doubt whether many of their teachers would see themselves as agents of the Chinese Communist Party. That includes a GM who regularly contributes to this Forum! Many allegations have also been made about Russian donations to various political movements and parties, especially over the past five years.

And now back to Covid Regulations for chess. Are any clubs suggesting that they wish their members to be double-jabbed by the end of September, unless they are under 18s or medically exempt? I don't mean asking for proof, as may be required at night-clubs or premier league football matches, but simply stating that this is the expectation for attendance? This suggestion was raised in discussion at the AGM of the Nottinghamshire Chess Association last Friday.

John Swain wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 26, 2021 9:05 pm

And now back to Covid Regulations for chess. Are any clubs suggesting that they wish their members to be double-jabbed by the end of September, unless they are under 18s or medically exempt? I don't mean asking for proof, as may be required at night-clubs or premier league football matches, but simply stating that this is the expectation for attendance? This suggestion was raised in discussion at the AGM of the Nottinghamshire Chess Association last Friday.

My local bridge club reopened for face to face bridge on Thursday 23rd July, but only those who have been fully vaccinated are currently allowed to attend.

I have indicated that I won't be returning to play until all members are permitted to do so.

I don't think our club is making any such requirement, though most regulars have had both their jabs anyway.

I'm not at all sure that such statements about expectations provide any meaningful reassurance in terms of risk. Chess is a discretionary activity run by volunteers on a not for profit basis. People should refrain from seeking reassurances from organisers and other players that they would not seek from other areas of life. To do so is only reasonable if the level of risk from playing chess is significantly higher than shopping or going to the pub. My local pub has just closed until August through a combination of self isolation requirements and staff holidays, so you could catch an infection on the way to the playing venue, as well as inside it. The debate about ongoing use of masks and observing some of the other hygiene recommendations is a reasonable discussion to hold but chess clubs shouldn't have to manage issues arising from vaccine status.

J T Melsom wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:32 am

I'm not at all sure that such statements about expectations provide any meaningful reassurance in terms of risk. Chess is a discretionary activity run by volunteers on a not for profit basis. People should refrain from seeking reassurances from organisers and other players that they would not seek from other areas of life. To do so is only reasonable if the level of risk from playing chess is significantly higher than shopping or going to the pub. My local pub has just closed until August through a combination of self isolation requirements and staff holidays, so you could catch an infection on the way to the playing venue, as well as inside it. The debate about ongoing use of masks and observing some of the other hygiene recommendations is a reasonable discussion to hold but chess clubs shouldn't have to manage issues arising from vaccine status.

Quite right. In normal circumstances there are very few situations where others are held responsible for our personal safety. The operating theatre, drivers of public transport are exceptions, but generally individuals are expected to understand self responsibility.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:22 pm

Angus French wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:50 pm

Christina Pagel thinks it likely we haven't peaked.

Ah, another academic who relies upon her funding from China. I realise that this will get me labelled here as some kind of a racist, but I am not convinced that the Chinese Communist Party has my best interests at heart.

I am inclined to agree with you.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:01 pm

Angus French wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 10:40 pm

Again - for the third time now - I refer you to Trisha Greenhalgh's Twitter thread.

Which boils down to "what the heck, why not, and in any case we're going to make you wear them for the rest of your miserable lives so get used to it.

Also, I note that the Telegraph piece refers to the Danish study on masks without any mention of criticisms of the study.

Which are?

Yes, absolutely. Collectivism shows its ugly face.

Gary Cook wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:33 am

Quite right. In normal circumstances there are very few situations where others are held responsible for our personal safety. The operating theatre, drivers of public transport are exceptions, but generally individuals are expected to understand self responsibility.

There are numerous situations where there is either an expectation, regulation or legal requirement to act in a way that does not adversely affect other people's safety, e.g.

• Low speed limits near schools are to protect children, not car drivers
• Food safety regulations are to protect the person eating the food, not the person preparing it
• Bans on jumping into swimming pools are to protect people already in the pool, not the jumper

Don’t think quite understood what I was saying. What you have come up with are laws to stop unreasonable behaviour.

My comment was about you handing over responsibility for my safety to others, if you read my post again I am sure you will see the difference.

Nick Burrows wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:20 am

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-wha ... s-12349337

Nobody is prevented from wearing a mask, many of us just doubt the efficacy.

Like vaccination, masks are not 100% effective. However, using masks and getting vaccinated is certainly better than doing nothing.

Gary Cook wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:57 am

Nick Burrows wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:20 am

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-wha ... s-12349337

Nobody is prevented from wearing a mask, many of us just doubt the efficacy.

Nobody is saying they are perfectly effective, but there is LOTS of evidence that they are somewhat effective.
The result of not wearing a mask due to "doubts of effectiveness" is that people die. It's as simple as that.

Phil Neatherway wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:59 am

Like vaccination, masks are not 100% effective.

Hospital grade masks, worn properly and thrown away after a single use, are certainly effective - at least, I would hope so. As for those blue things everyone wears, scrunched up in a pocket or purse until taken out for their 55th use and applied with big gaps around the nose, I do not believe any study has been done into whether they are better than 0% effective. If one has been, then I would assume the results were not released, in the manner of modern "science", because they were not those desired.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:42 pm

Phil Neatherway wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:59 am

Like vaccination, masks are not 100% effective.

Hospital grade masks, worn properly and thrown away after a single use, are certainly effective - at least, I would hope so. As for those blue things everyone wears, scrunched up in a pocket or purse until taken out for their 55th use and applied with big gaps around the nose, I do not believe any study has been done into whether they are better than 0% effective. If one has been, then I would assume the results were not released, in the manner of modern "science", because they were not those desired.

The N95 is effective, but very awkward to wear. The blue things are just spit catchers worn as a courtesy to the patient. I have not seen a study demonstrating effectiveness of blue masks used numerous times and cloth covers over the face.