A "mask-free" hour for shops?

[Richard Scott]

I personally feel a lot safer now 95% of people are wearing one

This is the big problem with masks, people feel safer but are they actually safer? May actually encourage people to take more risks so making issue worse? Personally I'd go for a mask hour and rest is mask free.

 

[MontyMinerWA]

Unless people have a valid medical reason for not wearing masks I really don't understand what the issue is.

 

[Huntergreed]

Unless people have a valid medical reason for not wearing masks I really don't understand what the issue is.

They’re uncomfortable, making shopping much less pleasant, and haven’t actually been proven to work. If I was given some evidence to show they work, then there would be no issue and I would happily comply for the time being, but until then I’m convinced this is a mix of political point scoring and trying to make people “feel safer”

 

[Essan]

Depends on how busy it is.

I accept that masks are necessary when people are in close proximity for a period of time. If I pop into Tesco for 5 minutes and there are only 5 other people in the store, a mask is totally unnecessary IMO. If there are 500 people and I spend an hour there (because like most customers I bump into a friend I haven't seen for several hours so therefore have to stand in the middle of the aisle catching up on the local gossip for half an hour*) and I then have to queue for another 10 minutes to get served, that's a completely different matter.


* why do so many people treat shops as social meeting places? And why are humans so obsessed with talking?

 

[Darandio]

Why don't we ask the companies, shop owners and people who actually work there what they want?

I personally feel a lot safer now 95% of people are wearing one

Now I know why they aren't asked. They give their honest appraisal of the situation and are then constantly challenged on it by those who think they know better.

 

[GB]

None of this halfass measure please. Either it's safe to not wear masks or is not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

None of this halfass measure please. Either it's safe to not wear masks or is not.

It's impossible to answer a question like that, as nothing in a pandemic is absolute - some acts will increase spread (such as meeting with friends without distancing), and other acts will decrease spread (such as wearing masks - we think!)

There is never, in any aspect of life whatsoever, an absolute "it's safe" or "it's not safe". Everything is on a continuum and is about acceptable risk. Some things are about risk to the individual (such as wearing seatbelts), while others are about risks to others (such as speed limits) and the latter need taking that bit more seriously.

Effectively, there is no possible way to be at zero risk of contracting COVID. It's about managing the risk.

 

[Smidster]

I personally hate the requirement but this suggestion is nonsense

Are you also going to suggest that for other laws you don't like? Should we have speeding hour? Park where you like hour? Smoking in the pub day?

 

[John Hunt]

I personally hate the requirement but this suggestion is nonsense

Are you also going to suggest that for other laws you don't like? Should we have speeding hour? Park where you like hour? Smoking in the pub day?

Totally agree.
Also - remember when this whole sorry episode started and people were panic buying? Supermarkets said NHS and 'at risk' would have an hour or so each day to themselves. And who turned up? Every bu**er.

 

[py_megapixel]

None of this halfass measure please. Either it's safe to not wear masks or is not.

It's far, far more complex than just describing things as "safe" and "unsafe"

Everything you do comes with a small risk of picking up the virus. There are things you can do to minimise this risk, but realistically it cannot be reduced to zero. It is largely your job to decide at what point you draw the line between comfort and safety (though at the moment the government seems to be trying to do it for us somewhat)

 

[AdamWW]

* why do so many people treat shops as social meeting places? And why are humans so obsessed with talking?

If they weren't, this forum would be a lot quieter.

 

[py_megapixel]

As for my thoughts on the proposals. I am probably in a minority here when I say that I don't massively mind wearing a face mask. I would in fact be more than happy to do a decent-sized supermarket shop in one. However, I'm not really in favour of mandating them for various reasons, the main one being that it's far too easy to create stigma against those with genuine exemptions who can't wear a mask.

That said, a "mask-free hour" sounds like an utterly stupid idea. As @Smidster said earlier, it sets a dangerous precedent - for example, should the train operators have a "noise nuisance hour" where anybody is allowed to be as unpleasantly loud as they wish? I don't think so.

The other problem is that if you say "you can go in without a mask, but you have to stick to social distancing" then people will start to completely disregard social distancing while wearing a mask, which gives the public the false idea that masks make them immune to spreading the disease. This will then increase cases in the population again and cause even more problems.

 

[43066]

I have to say I’m strongly against this, although I can see where she was coming from. It would just further reinforce the idea that wearing masks is “normal” and that those who aren’t wearing them should be ostracised.

As others have said above, if this was brought in, the expectation will then become that anyone who cannot wear a mask, for whatever reason, can *only* shop in the mask-free hour. That would be quite wrong.

 

[Enthusiast]

Unless people have a valid medical reason for not wearing masks I really don't understand what the issue is.

One issue has already been pointed out. Another is that you do not need a valid medical certificate to enter a shop without a face covering. Unless you are exempt (by way of age, or you work in the shop, are a police officer, etc.) you need a "reasonable excuse". The legislation provides a non-exhaustive list of eight reasonable excuses and six of them are not medically related.

 

[bramling]

I have to say I’m strongly against this, although I can see where she was coming from. It would just further reinforce the idea that wearing masks is “normal” and that those who aren’t wearing them should be ostracised.

As others have said above, if this was brought in, the expectation will then become that anyone who cannot wear a mask, for whatever reason, can *only* shop in the mask-free hour. That would be quite wrong.

Absolutely agreed. IMO it should be the mask times which are the exception, not the other way round. Give them a couple of hours in the morning, and if they don't like it then tough.

 

[Ianno87]

The fact that Anne Widdecombe has come out (surprise, surprise) as anti-mask is the strongest proof yet that masks are a fundamentally good idea.

 

[MontyMinerWA]

They’re uncomfortable, making shopping much less pleasant, and haven’t actually been proven to work. If I was given some evidence to show they work, then there would be no issue and I would happily comply for the time being, but until then I’m convinced this is a mix of political point scoring and trying to make people “feel safer”

How do you think surgeons cope when they're performing lengthy operations?

 

[Richard Scott]

The fact that Anne Widdecombe has come out (surprise, surprise) as anti-mask is the strongest proof yet that masks are a fundamentally good idea.

You probably have inadvertently hit the nail on the head. This is possibly the strongest proof in absence of any decent scientific evidence.

 

[Scotrail12]

The fact that Anne Widdecombe has come out (surprise, surprise) as anti-mask is the strongest proof yet that masks are a fundamentally good idea.

Now now, Queen Widdy is a national treasure - alongside Gemma Collins and Piers Morgan!

 

[bramling]

How do you think surgeons cope when they're performing lengthy operations?

Surgeons don't tend to walk straight off the street into the operating theatre though, do they? Their masks are used in a strictly controlled and sterile environment, with the whole process being strictly controlled.

 

[py_megapixel]

Absolutely agreed. IMO it should be the mask times which are the exception, not the other way round. Give them a couple of hours in the morning, and if they don't like it then tough.

Why not an even split?
You could do something like on Mon/Wed/Fri/Sat masks in the morning and no masks in the afternoon, and the other way round on other days of the week.

Overall though I think we have to say either masks for everyone all the time, or no mask requirement at all. This could be done on a shop-by-shop basis, depending on social distancing measures available in that particular circumstance.

Anything else is a confusing overcomplication.

 

[Ianno87]

Why not an even split?
You could do something like on Mon/Wed/Fri/Sat masks in the morning and no masks in the afternoon, and the other way round on other days of the week.

Overall though I think we have to say either masks for everyone all the time, or no mask requirement at all. This could be done on a shop-by-shop basis, depending on social distancing measures available in that particular circumstance.

Anything else is a confusing overcomplication.

Anyting other than the existing very simple "just wear a mask unless you have a reasonable excuse" is a confusing overcomplication.

 

[py_megapixel]

Anyting other than the existing very simple "just wear a mask unless you have a reasonable excuse" is a confusing overcomplication.

To be completely frank most of the population who don't have an exemption are perfectly happy to wear a mask, so the vocal minority who whinge about it can just put up with it, or use one of the wealth of available on line options which don't require going into a shop at all.

However, where social distancing is good enough that people can be kept apart by 2 metres anyway, I'm not convinced that the benefits of wearing a mask are worth the backlash of mandating them. But not all shops can achieve social distancing to this degree.
This is why I would propose mask requirements done on a shop-by-shop basis.

 

[vlad]

I personally feel a lot safer now 95% of people are wearing one

I don't. People seem to think that as they're wearing masks they don't need to keep their distance from others.

 

[43066]

Anyting other than the existing very simple "just wear a mask unless you have a reasonable excuse" is a confusing overcomplication.

“Wear a mask only if you want to.”

Seems perfectly clear and simple to me!

 

[py_megapixel]

“Wear a mask if you want to.”

Seems perfectly clear and simple to me!

Yes, but defeats the entire object.

If you don't want to wear a mask, then why not just order online?

 

[Darandio]

I don't. People seem to think that as they're wearing masks they don't need to keep their distance from others.

Do you work in a shop and spend hour after hour surrounded by people?

 

[MontyMinerWA]

Surgeons don't tend to walk straight off the street into the operating theatre though, do they? Their masks are used in a strictly controlled and sterile environment, with the whole process being strictly controlled.

They're still wearing a mask so what's the difference?

 

[43066]

Yes, but defeats the entire object.

Does it? This is exactly the point: What is the object? As has been repeatedly stated, there’s scant evidence that masks are of any benefit.

As far as I can tell the entire stupid exercise is just about the government posturing, and pandering to peoples’ irrational fears. I’m sorry but I simply refuse to buy into this nonsense any longer.

If you don't want to wear a mask, then why not just order online?

Because it’s more convenient to go into my local shops/supermarket, as I have been doing so far throughout this pandemic, and will continue to do!

 

[py_megapixel]

Does it? This is exactly the point: What is the object? As has been repeatedly stated, there’s scant evidence that masks are of any benefit.

As far as I can tell the entire stupid exercise is just about the government posturing, and pandering to peoples’ irrational fears. I’m sorry but I simply refuse to buy into this nonsense any longer.

The government's incentives here are to get the economy working again, which, inherently, requires people to be out in the shops again, spending money. You might think people's fears are irrational, but do you think people are going to shop if they are scared of doing so? No. Making the public feel safe is just as important as making the experience actually safe.

I'm not sure I really agree with the government policy here, but I can see where it's coming from.