Face coverings to become mandatory in shops in England (includes poll)

[Puffing Devil]

From reading these pages you would gain the impression that there are protesters on the streets demanding masks be worn. Now perhaps I'm just lucky but the outrage at the instruction to wear masks seems far far louder than those who were saying they should be mandated both before and after the announcement. My Facebook seems fairly quite on the subject (both ways) and I've not spotted anything particularly strong one way or the other in the media. Indeed the loudest voices I've come across are the those who are leading the anti-mask crusade on this very Forum! So where are you all seeing the "locktivists", "coronaphobes" and "muzzlers" calling so loudly for masks?

Perhaps there's some confusion around masks and muzzles? Let's clear that up.

This is a mask, which does reduce transmission of COVID



This is a muzzle. I defend people's right to choice, though it won't help with COVID transmission as the gaps in the weave appear a little too large.

 

[AdamWW]

Indeed. What's always forgotten is that covid has never been stated to be a threat to anyone that wouldn't already be at great risk to the flu, or even a common cold, yet there's still large enough portions of the population that think this is ebola. It's already run through enough care homes that those that would be at risk have already had things play out one way or another. Just bunker up the hospitals and care homes that haven't had an outbreak already, and let the rest of the nation return to 2019, this would then be completely over by October

You don't think there's any risk of enough people needing hospital treatment for it during that time that we might not cope?

And from what I've read, the "underlying conditions" that are often quoted as implicated with Covid deaths are not those that would put people at great risk from flu, and certainly not a cold. We're talking about things like having diabetes.

Remember the death rates quoted are for people who actually survive, not who get through it with any semblance of good health left, and that it assumes they get all the hospital treatment they need.

 

[adc82140]

The death rates are quoted for anyone that has tested positive for Covid-19, ever, and has subsequently died for any reason, including so far gunshot wounds and getting hit by a bus. All other countries have a 28 day cutoff. The further we go, the more deaths that will be falsely attributed. That's why this finay blew up last week.

 

[Essan]

From reading these pages you would gain the impression that there are protesters on the streets demanding masks be worn.

Even more so, you'd get the impression that the UK was the first and only country imposing such a punitive measure - where in fact we're well behind much of the world.

Wikipedia has an extensive list of countries where masks are compulsory, in many cases this is whenever you leave your house; not just on public transport and within shops.

Face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[AdamWW]

The death rates are quoted for anyone that has tested positive for Covid-19, ever, and has subsequently died for any reason, including so far gunshot wounds and getting hit by a bus. All other countries have a 28 day cutoff. The further we go, the more deaths that will be falsely attributed. That's why this finay blew up last week.

That is true of the PHE (English) daily numbers, yes.

But calculations of ones chance of surving Covid-19 as a function of age and health, taken from evidence across the world, are something different.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thanks. It's always been knocking around, but Covid has indirectly brought it to the fore. My BMI is on the high side, so to lower my risk factors I'm doing something about it, but I'm being limited by the fact that strenuous exercise is causing undue breathlessness (moreso than just being a bit unfit)

Definitely get checked because there are other (much worse if not treated) causes of undue breathlessness, e.g. blood clots. I'm now recovering from one myself. Not difficult to treat (just tablets, basically) but they can be really, really bad if untreated.

 

[Yew]

This is a mask, which does reduce transmission of COVID

Every randomised controlled trial ever conducted disagrees with this statement.

 

[jtuk]

You don't think there's any risk of enough people needing hospital treatment for it during that time that we might not cope?

Not in the slightest. We've got so much capacity stockpiled from when it was actually at its peak that was never used, which was a correct precaution to take when there was fears that it was more dangerous than it actually turns out to be.

Take out everyone that has already had it (which is going to be orders of magnitude more than those who have actually tested positive for it), take out those that would have had it but due to pre-existing t-cell defences can't get it, then take out the enormous percentage of the population for which an infection would not require hospitalisation, and there's not many left at all. Properly protect care homes and hospitals as I stated, and that goes down even further

 

[Richard Scott]

Perhaps there's some confusion around masks and muzzles? Let's clear that up.

This is a mask, which does reduce transmission of COVID



This is a muzzle. I defend people's right to choice, though it won't help with COVID transmission as the gaps in the weave appear a little too large.

No a face mask definitely does not reduce transmission of COVID. It may reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, which can lead to COVID-19.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Every randomised controlled trial ever conducted disagrees with this statement.

Take a look outside the echo chamber which this thread has become.

 

[Yew]

Take a look outside the echo chamber which this thread has become.

And the statement still stands, there may be some low-quality evidence, but the lack of control groups and randomisation makes this not much better than anecdote.

 

[AdamWW]

Not in the slightest. We've got so much capacity stockpiled from when it was actually at its peak that was never used, which was a correct precaution to take when there was fears that it was more dangerous than it actually turns out to be.

Take out everyone that has already had it (which is going to be orders of magnitude more than those who have actually tested positive for it), take out those that would have had it but due to pre-existing t-cell defences can't get it, then take out the enormous percentage of the population for which an infection would not require hospitalisation, and there's not many left at all. Properly protect care homes and hospitals as I stated, and that goes down even further

Easy to say - can you justify all of that? And explain how you isolate care homes (difficult) and hospitals (impossible I'd say) from the rest of the country.

The professionals don't seem to be so confident.

 

[Puffing Devil]

No a face mask definitely does not reduce transmission of COVID. It may reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, which can lead to COVID-19.

I apologise if my slightly satirical post did not meet your exacting epidemiological standards.

And the statement still stands, there may be some low-quality evidence, but the lack of control groups and randomisation makes this not much better than anecdote.

There appears to be enough evidence to convince the WHO and many governments around the world of the efficacy and benefits of face coverings in public. I would like to agree with you, but I don't want us both to be wrong.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There appears to be enough evidence to convince the WHO and many governments around the world of the efficacy and benefits of face coverings in public. I would like to agree with you, but I don't want us both to be wrong.

I hope they do have an effect, as if they do we can afford to reopen more things. While I'd rather we'd eradicated domestically and could just close borders, "everything near enough as normal but with masks" is preferable to "loads of stuff shut".

 

[Mag_seven]

Not in the slightest. We've got so much capacity stockpiled from when it was actually at its peak that was never used, which was a correct precaution to take when there was fears that it was more dangerous than it actually turns out to be.

Take out everyone that has already had it (which is going to be orders of magnitude more than those who have actually tested positive for it), take out those that would have had it but due to pre-existing t-cell defences can't get it, then take out the enormous percentage of the population for which an infection would not require hospitalisation, and there's not many left at all. Properly protect care homes and hospitals as I stated, and that goes down even further

Easy to say - can you justify all of that? And explain how you isolate care homes (difficult) and hospitals (impossible I'd say) from the rest of the country.

The professionals don't seem to be so confident.

Just a gentle reminder that we are discussing the mandatory wearing of face coverings in shops in this thread.

If anyone wants to discuss anything else then they are welcome to find a more appropriate thread to discuss it in or start a new one. Thanks.

 

[yorkie]

I am yet to see anyone be able to provide conclusive evidence that the wearing of face coverings is warranted but I'm keeping an open mind if anyone wishes to try to convince me.

I was in my local co op just now and no customers were wearing masks, with only 1 day to go. Some may have been covered by exemptions but it's impossible to tell. I spoke with several cleaners at work about this subject and they are also unconvinced.

It seems the people really pushing for mask wearing are generally the same people who wanted a longer/harsher lockdown; people who are able to work at home and are encouraging others to stay at home. They also tend to be the same people who wanted schools to be closed. I don't see many of the usual down to earth regular people I know supporting this.

I think the mandating of masks is popular among an extremely vocal minority, this giving the illusion that they speak for the majority.

I also had a very interesting conversation with my union rep regarding the sort of things this small but very vocal group are saying. I won't say too much more on that subject here but, as a member of a union myself, I maintain the view that unions tend to be directed by a vocal minority and my view has not changed. If I followed Union advise to the letter I would feel like, and expect I would look like, a paranoid idiot.

Most ordinary people seem to have serious concerns about changes to our way of life being forced on us. I personally see masks as only a small impact and am not too fussed, but others I speak to tend to be more hostile towards the concept and I think it's a symbolic thing too.

Many ordinary people seem fed up of the wealthier 'stay at home' extremists harming their livelihoods and masks are just a highly visible part of this battle over normality.

You don't think there's any risk of enough people needing hospital treatment for it during that time that we might not cope?

If this was true, why are cases decreasing in places like Sweden?

https://www.thelocal.se/20200608/why-isnt-sweden-asking-people-to-wear-face-masks

People don't tend to wear masks there.

....in Sweden it is not recommended even while people continue to visit restaurants, bars and shops.

 

[Darandio]

Me and my daughter wore them this morning for the first time to do our main shop, we thought we would do it a day early just to experience what it was like. No issues, no big deal and people were noticeably more tolerant of passing in closer proximity.

 

[DB]

Take a look outside the echo chamber which this thread has become.

There have been no RCTs which show any positive impact, so far as I am aware. There was a link to one study (not an RCT) posted on here yesterday which did have some credibility, but beyond that not a lot could be said as it isn't clear from it what else was done at the time - e.g. if most of the US states looked at introduced other similar measures at the same time, it's not clear what the impact of the masks element was.

 

[Yew]

There appears to be enough evidence to convince the WHO and many governments around the world of the efficacy and benefits of face coverings in public. I would like to agree with you, but I don't want us both to be wrong.

I think there's increasing evidence that the WHO was under political pressure to endorse masks.

 

[AdamWW]

There have been no RCTs which show any positive impact, so far as I am aware. There was a link to one study (not an RCT) posted on here yesterday which did have some credibility, but beyond that not a lot could be said as it isn't clear from it what else was done at the time - e.g. if most of the US states looked at introduced other similar measures at the same time, it's not clear what the impact of the masks element was.

It was pretty clear from my skimming of it that the authors weren't so stupid as to ignore the presence of other measures being introduced. Whether they were able to adequately allow for them is of course another question.

I don't know how anyone could do a satisfactory clinical trial - as the idea is to prevent transmission, it doesn't work if you randomly gave half the people masks in a town and not the other half (and you really couldn't do a blind trial unless you could design masks that looked the same but some were known to have no effect). So it will always involve comparing different areas, or the same area at different times.

Or you do something in an artificial situation which people can then say doesn't mirror reality.

So the lack of controlled trials in itself isn't, I'd say, a good argument that they aren't useful.

But it does make it hard to know.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If this was true, why are cases decreasing in places like Sweden?

https://www.thelocal.se/20200608/why-isnt-sweden-asking-people-to-wear-face-masks

People don't tend to wear masks there.

It's possible that they have hit herd immunity.

For those who find them uncomfortable, by the way (and I know I do) have you tried different types? A classic disposable medical one is very uncomfortable, but I find a shaped-to-fit cloth one to be far less uncomfortable and they are available in attractive colours too. Perhaps worth a try.

 

[ainsworth74]

So just so I have it clear in my own head the host of other countries and agencies that have suggested mask wearing is a good idea have all caved into political pressure from their own versions of "locktivists", "Coronaphobes" and "muzzlers"? Because we have been the outlier amongst most nations so far...

I think the mandating of masks is popular among an extremely vocal minority, this giving the illusion that they speak for the majority.

Are they "extremely vocal"? Again I've not spotted them myself (my thanks to @Tetchytyke and @Bantamzen for sharing their Facebook experiences ) and the by far the loudest and most ardent group of people I've come across in my travels across the internet are the antis on this thread! I'm not saying that there aren't nosy pro-mask wearing people out there but I was rather hoping for someone to point me towards them so I could see for myself!

 

[AdamWW]

It's possible that they have hit herd immunity.

Sweden seem to be going for the approach that social distancing is better than masks, and that they are likely to do more harm than good.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sweden seem to be going for the approach that social distancing is better than masks, and that they are likely to do more harm than good.

Which is an interesting view not reflected in other countries. It is possible they are right and everyone else is wrong, though, nobody really knows but by trying things!

 

[MikeWM]

OK try this - with the caveat that I don't know how reputable the journal it's in is, and I haven't looked into their methodology (just because it's complex doesn't mean it's right).

But it attempts to examine the impact of requiring face coverings in public - so it refers to whatever people actually wear not medical masks or respirators, and to whatever contacts in public actually take place.

Clearly it is a very difficult thing to try to work out as there are potentially so many confounding variables, but their conclusion is that yes, they do have a significant effect.

That's interesting, thanks, but the way they have done modeling is really hard to follow.

The comments below the study flag up some potential issues (from people who managed to digest it better than I did, I guess!). For me, this one is the most persuasive:

It seems that most states listed in the appendix as having controlled the spread of the virus following mandates to wear masks are clustered in the northeast. Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island. New Hampshire didn't mandate masks early on, yet they are also controlling the spread - again, northeastern state. And states that mandated masks early on that are in other parts of the country often aren't faring better than their neighbours that didn't issue early mandates. In particular Kentucky, New Mexico and Utah. The sample size is super small so it's difficult to say whether this is anything but a coincidence, but it would be interesting to see the impacts on the results of a control for geography.

It seems fairly clear that latitude has an effect on the way this spreads (quicker and with a short spike in cooler latitudes; more spread out with a longer, shallower spike in warmer places). So even if the modelling is decent, all it could be showing is a correlation, not a causation.

 

[Bantamzen]

So just so I have it clear in my own head the host of other countries and agencies that have suggested mask wearing is a good idea have all caved into political pressure from their own versions of "locktivists", "Coronaphobes" and "muzzlers"? Because we have been the outlier amongst most nations so far...



Are they "extremely vocal"? Again I've not spotted them myself (my thanks to @Tetchytyke and @Bantamzen for sharing their Facebook experiences ) and the by far the loudest and most ardent group of people I've come across in my travels across the internet are the antis on this thread! I'm not saying that there aren't nosy pro-mask wearing people out there but I was rather hoping for someone to point me towards them so I could see for myself!

In terms of social media experiences, if anyone is curious and has access to something like Facebook a good starting place to find maskivists are news media threads on articles relating to anything remotely covid based. Ten minutes of browsing these and you'll find them lurking.

From my own personal circles though, maskivists are rife, I've just checked and at least 25% of the posts today are of the "wear a mask or kill people" genres. A bit more than usual, but nonetheless a fairly typical mix of memes and "went to shop, no masks worn by others, shocking" variety. Its been like this since just after the turn of the year. Occasionally I have challenged their views as I have done here, and interestingly they tend to cite the same, limited studies that are trotted out time and again here. Considering the evidence is supposed to be growing, not a lot more is ever offered, hence my growing cynicism.

 

[Darandio]

Sweden seem to be going for the approach that social distancing is better than masks, and that they are likely to do more harm than good.

They also seem like a much more tolerant society that will actually social distance when asked so it's possible that it is a successful model for them? Ask us to do the same thing and we complain before trying to do the complete opposite.

With a colder climate they also seem to already appreciate the risk of such diseases more with some of the things they do. Things such as leaving babies outside in the freezing cold when visiting a cafe for example, they believe it's healthy and reduces the risk of them catching anything. I cannot see that happening here.

 

[MikeWM]

I think there's increasing evidence that the WHO was under political pressure to endorse masks.

Even a BBC reporter (!) told us that she had heard that from multiple sources, and when put to the WHO it wasn't denied.

(probably not going to be a BBC reporter for much longer on that basis, mind...)

 

[adc82140]

Back to shops, is a motorway service station classed as a shop? I guess the WH Smith, Waitrose etc concessions are, but what if you're just going in for a pee? Face covering needed or not?

 

[Huntergreed]

Back to shops, is a motorway service station classed as a shop? I guess the WH Smith, Waitrose etc concessions are, but what if you're just going in for a pee? Face covering needed or not?

I imagine service stations will follow the same guidance as shopping centres, which (I believe) is that masks must be worn in them (it is in Scotland anyway)