UK face coverings discussion

[RomeoCharlie71]

True. But if you want to make masks compulsory, make them for staff too, and not just for passangers / customers! Exactly like they've done in Italy, where onboard the bus, BOTH the passengers AND the bus driver MUST wear a face mask.

Drivers need not wear one if protected by a perspex screen - the majority of whom, now are, in the UK.

Besides, I'd refuse to drive wearing one anyway. It affects my downward peripheral vision.

 

[NorthOxonian]

True. But if you want to make masks compulsory, make them for staff too, and not just for passangers / customers! Exactly like they've done in Italy, where onboard the bus, BOTH the passengers AND the bus driver MUST wear a face mask.

I don't want my bus driver's field of vision reduced and I certainly don't want them distracted by how a mask feels on their face. If they're behind a screen anyway, there is essentially no point (you could argue they should wear one to "set an example", but is that worth the distraction?).

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

According to our wonderful leaders it's to stop people spreading it, not prevent them from catching it. This, they claim, has 'growing evidence' to support it - evidence which strangely they don't seem to have referred to specifically anywhere...

Don't forget Scotland's Chief Nursing Officer mentioning the "growing evidence" that it gives the wearer "some" protection too. Funnily enough, it wasn't mentioned again and the evidence I'm yet to see.

 

[DB]

I can't find a link that isn't the Sun or Mail and they aren't getting my clicks, but there was an anti-masker incursion into a Morrisons in South London today, telling people to take their masks off because they're "BAD!". Wouldn't surprise me if they take every opportunity to spout about their right to choose what happens to their body while completely ignoring that quite a lot of people are choosing to wear them. The vigilantism goes both ways it seems :P

That is idiot behaviour, and clearly pretty rare.

Most of us who are anti-mask have absolutely no problem with people choosing to wear masks. What we have a problem with is it being enforced on such flimsy evidence.

 

[Domh245]

Are you sure about that? The point of masks is both to stop you from getting the virus, and to prevent you passing it on to others.

It really isn't. Note how the topic title here, and all relevant laws and guidance talk about "face coverings", not masks, and why government guidance still tells you how to make a face covering out of old t shirts. The aim is to stop people spreading it, which is also why staff don't need to be forced to wear them (other than to normalise it for customers) - if all bar the exempt wear theirs and do it properly, there's no COV-SARS2 in the air or on surfaces to catch!

 

[talldave]

Cases in my opinion continue to increase because some people simply refuse to wear them whenever they need to thinking that this virus is all over. Very irresponsible!

Can you define "case"?

You've made a good point actually. As much as I support the mandating in masks in indoor spaces, they should have made them compulsory for staff too, and not just customers / passangers. The staff are the ones MORE vulnerable to catching the virus as they spend something like 7-8 hours inside an indoor space, not the customers / passangers, where in the case of shops, only tend to spend a maximum of something like 30-40 minutes.

And the Police & BTP? It's amazing that the idiots making the rules think a uniform prevents a virus. Either there's a deadly killer virus on the loose or there isn't; apparently since we're not protecting the Police from it, there isn't.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Face masks reduce severity of coronavirus symptoms in wearer, scientists find

Taking in fewer particles makes it easier for immune system to cope when infected, experts say

www.independent.co.uk

More evidence to suggest that face masks really do work and why everyone in my opinion should wear them to halt the spread of the virus.

A spokesman for the NHS welcomed this great news.
Yes, the National Hamster Service is delighted. Even though the tests were in a laboratory and the participants weren’t even wearing the masks

 

[SouthEastBuses]

The driver is behind a perspex screen which provides more protection than a mask.

I do however believe that staff who enter the passenger compartment of a public transport vehicles should wear one while they are there unless they fit one of the Government's exemptions.

In Italy, the bus driver MUST wear a mask by law when on the bus, no matter whether he's driving or not. And this is despite the fact they continue to use middle door boarding (Front door out of use exactly like on TfL London buses during the lockdown) and protected anti assault screens.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

In Italy, the bus driver MUST wear a mask by law when on the bus, no matter whether he's driving or not. And this is despite the fact they continue to use middle door boarding (Front door out of use exactly like on TfL London buses during the lockdown) and protected anti assault screens.

Poor drivers, that's a bit far.

Are there any exemptions in Italy?

 

[SouthEastBuses]

It really isn't. Note how the topic title here, and all relevant laws and guidance talk about "face coverings", not masks, and why government guidance still tells you how to make a face covering out of old t shirts. The aim is to stop people spreading it, which is also why staff don't need to be forced to wear them (other than to normalise it for customers) - if all bar the exempt wear theirs and do it properly, there's no COV-SARS2 in the air or on surfaces to catch!

You said it!!!!!!!!!!!
If that was all true, then, forget about Coronavirus unlike right now. Sure, we would have to wear masks, but at least we would be able to enjoy the 2019 normal once again, just with compulsory masks in indoor places.

 

[talldave]

Are you sure about that? The point of masks is both to stop you from getting the virus, and to prevent you passing it on to others.

You pop your mask on, I'll spray some perfume, you tell me if you can smell the perfume. I tell you the name - it's called Eau de Covid.

 

[DB]

If that was all true, then, forget about Coronavirus unlike right now. Sure, we would have to wear masks, but at least we would be able to enjoy the 2019 normal once again, just with compulsory masks in indoor places.

I'm sorry, but that is a ridiculous statement - it is not "the 2019 normal" or anything like it if everyone is forced to be muzzled.

Quite apart from the evidence for masks making any difference outside of medical settings being very flimsy at best...

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Poor drivers, that's a bit far.

Are there any exemptions in Italy?

Yes.

Obbligo mascherina dall’8 ottobre: dove, quando e per chi

Nuovo obbligo di portare la mascherina sempre con sé e di indossarla al chiuso e all'aperto, in tutti i luoghi accessibili al pubblico e in quelli in cui si possono incontrare persone non conviventi. Ecco le regole da seguire.

www.money.it

"Si ha l’obbligo di indossare la mascherina in tutti i luoghi chiusi accessibili al pubblico e comunque in tutti i casi in cui non sia possibile rispettare il distanziamento sociale, fatta eccezione per i bambini di età inferiore ai 6 anni e i soggetti con forme di disabilità non compatibili con l’uso continuativo della mascherina."

Which means, anyone who is under 6 or have disabilities that make mask wearing not suitable is legally exempt.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

The driver is behind a perspex screen which provides more protection than a mask.

Protection for who? The passengers?
So why are visors, which make a similar barrier between wearer and others around them, not acceptable as a face-covering?

 

[NorthOxonian]

You said it!!!!!!!!!!!
If that was all true, then, forget about Coronavirus unlike right now. Sure, we would have to wear masks, but at least we would be able to enjoy the 2019 normal once again, just with compulsory masks in indoor places.

I can't enjoy myself when I'm wearing a mask. They make my breathing much more noticeable, and depending on the style and how it's fit, I'll often be panicking about what happens if it comes loose and falls down. That happened to me on a bus a few weeks back and I actually got off and had to calm down for a few minutes. Masks really do make life unpleasant. I've tried to mitigate this by finding types which aren't as restrictive, but it's still difficult. I wouldn't want to live like this for a moment longer than absolutely necessary.

And that's before considering how dispiriting they are. Looking around and seeing a sea of masked faces - this not being able to see people smile or their facial expressions - it's deeply sinister and unpleasant. I thought I might have got used to it by now, but I really haven't changed my view on that.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Protection for who? The passengers?
So why are visors, which make a similar barrier between wearer and others around them, not acceptable as a face-covering?

I assume due to the gap around the bottom

 

[SouthEastBuses]

I can't enjoy myself when I'm wearing a mask. They make my breathing much more noticeable, and depending on the style and how it's fit, I'll often be panicking about what happens if it comes loose and falls down. That happened to me on a bus a few weeks back and I actually got off and had to calm down for a few minutes. Masks really do make life unpleasant. I've tried to mitigate this by finding types which aren't as restrictive, but it's still difficult. I wouldn't want to live like this for a moment longer than absolutely necessary.

And that's before considering how dispiriting they are. Looking around and seeing a sea of masked faces - this not being able to see people smile or their facial expressions - it's deeply sinister and unpleasant. I thought I might have got used to it by now, but I really haven't changed my view on that.

I do agree with you, but in my opinion masks are one of the only ways, if not the most important factor, to reduce the spread of coronavirus.

Whilst I hate the idea of missing the smile of my friends and family, I would much rather have to wear a mask but at least be able to enjoy the civil liberties and freedoms, rather than being forced to stay at home all the time.

 

[DB]

I assume due to the gap around the bottom

But that only matters in Scotland remember! In England (and I think Wales?) it's fine.

Nice to have such consistency, isn't it?

 

[DB]

Whilst I hate the idea of missing the smile of my friends and family, I would much rather have to wear a mask but at least be able to enjoy the civil liberties and freedoms, rather than being forced to stay at home all the time.

Not sure why you think this is an either/or choice - it really isn't. The government semi-admitted that the actual reason for masks was to give people 'confidence' to go out shopping. I'm not sure to what extent it did that, but it does seem to have put of a sizeable minority who were previously happy to go in shops but now avoid them whereever possible because of the mask issue.

It also seems to have led to people abandoning distancing in many cases, and that plus the fiddling with masks could mean they actually have the opposite effect. But of course nobody knows, because what they are supposed to achieve has never been quantified and is not measured.

 

[bramling]

You've made a good point actually. As much as I support the mandating in masks in indoor spaces, they should have made them compulsory for staff too, and not just customers / passangers. The staff are the ones MORE vulnerable to catching the virus as they spend something like 7-8 hours inside an indoor space, not the customers / passangers, where in the case of shops, only tend to spend a maximum of something like 30-40 minutes.

Why not let the staff make their own decisions?

I am really fed up with the way people seem to think it’s acceptable to impose their opinions on the actions of others. Like I posted elsewhere, I really am ready to explode if someone says the wrong thing to me regarding masks, and I bet I’m not the only one.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

I do agree with you, but in my opinion masks are one of the only ways, if not the most important factor, to reduce the spread of coronavirus.

Whilst I hate the idea of missing the smile of my friends and family, I would much rather have to wear a mask but at least be able to enjoy the civil liberties and freedoms, rather than being forced to stay at home all the time.

If masks were so important then they'd have been mandated at the outset. Alas, they weren't.

I think distancing is the most effective way of reducing spread - because if you're not near anyone you can't spread it, regardless if you're wearing a mask or not!

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Not sure why you think this is an either/or choice - it really isn't. The government semi-admitted that the actual reason for masks was to give people 'confidence' to go out shopping. I'm not sure to what extent it did that, but it does seem to have put of a sizeable minority who were previously happy to go in shops but now avoid them whereever possible because of the mask issue.

I've seen the same - and the people moaning to their local supermarket or bus operator on Twitter about not customers not wearing face coverings, are probably the same people who were too scared to come out because it wasn't mandatory for face coverings to be worn.

But they're perfectly happy for people not to distance because they're wearing the golden bullet tea towels.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Protection for who? The passengers?

Both.

So why are visors, which make a similar barrier between wearer and others around them, not acceptable as a face-covering?

Because a properly enclosed perspex screen doesn't have a big gap at the sides and underneath for the virus to get round.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

If masks were so important then they'd have been mandated at the outset. Alas, they weren't.

I think distancing is the most effective way of reducing spread - because if you're not near anyone you can't spread it, regardless if you're wearing a mask or not!

They weren't, in my opinion, because unfortunately there weren't enough for the whole population back at the beginning, and back then the NHS had a priority.

Now that the NHS has all the masks they need, the Government is mandating the use of masks in all indoor spaces and outdoor spaces where social distancing isn't possible.

 

[bramling]

I've seen the same - and the people moaning to their local supermarket or bus operator on Twitter about not customers not wearing face coverings, are probably the same people who were too scared to come out because it wasn't mandatory for face coverings to be worn.

But they're perfectly happy for people not to distance because they're wearing the golden bullet tea towels.

During the panic buying I read an article by a behaviour psychologist, who postulated that the reason for that was because *a reaction* made people feel like they were regaining some control of a situation which they felt they had lost control of.

It might have been a perverse and irrational reaction, but it made them feel back in control of the situation. More and more people then copied it for various reasons until we had a full-on frenzy, people prepared to fight with each other over a pack of toilet rolls.

We now seem to be going down the same road with masks. Another stupid measure which some people latched on to, in many cases without realising or understanding the rationale behind it.

It is extremely concerning how a bit of fear can affect rational decision-making. It also shows how an element of society is rather unpleasantly authoritarian towards others.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

They weren't, in my opinion, because unfortunately there weren't enough for the whole population back at the beginning, and back then the NHS had a priority.

Government is mandating the use of masks in ... outdoor spaces where social distancing isn't possible.

Indeed, but what if there was another shortage? The general public who are (unnecessarily) wearing N95s and similar medical-grade PPE in non-clinical settings would be to blame for that, yes?

Stop making things up - they're not mandatory in outdoor spaces - anywhere.

We now seem to be going down the same road with masks. Another stupid measure which some people latched on to, in many cases without realising or understanding the rationale behind it.

It is extremely concerning how a bit of fear can affect rational decision-making. It also shows how an element of society is rather unpleasantly authoritarian towards others.

Agreed - except that face coverings are now mandatory in law but buying a century's stock of penne[1] pasta wasn't!

[1] Other varieties of pasta are available.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Indeed, but what if there was another shortage? All the people wearing N95s and similar would be to blame for that, yes?

Stop making things up - they're not mandatory in outdoor spaces - anywhere.

Well they are, but only in railway and bus stations. Other than that, you're correct, no need (albeit there is an encouragement I believe, but no compulsion whatsoever) to wear a mask in outdoor spaces (apart from railway/bus stations). And I never spread false info anyway.

 

[talldave]

They weren't, in my opinion, because unfortunately there weren't enough for the whole population back at the beginning, and back then the NHS had a priority.

Now that the NHS has all the masks they need, the Government is mandating the use of masks in all indoor spaces and outdoor spaces where social distancing isn't possible.

Well that argument falls flat since we're apparently meant to fashion a face covering from a T shirt, and there were plenty of those around in March.

Professional medics wouldn't be so stupid as to think that a flimsy layer of snot laden T shirt offered any protection.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Well they are, but only in railway and bus stations.

You're right - I forgot about that. I forgot that there was an extremely high risk of catching it on an empty railway station platform compared to a non-socially distanced queue outside Primark.

 

[87electric]

A spokesman for the NHS welcomed this great news.
Yes, the National Hamster Service is delighted. Even though the tests were in a laboratory and the participants weren’t even wearing the masks

I just can't stop laughing. Can I book you for stand up?

I'm always concerned that evidence supplied by "Scientists" and "Experts" or "Modellers" is believed to be fact by the general public. That is alarming. As well as following the science, following the money should also be a consideration.
Who are their paymasters funding their research? Which corporation or company? Who benefits moneywise? Take a look at the wider picture and see why decisions are made on behalf of us.