Masks in emergency situations

[A Challenge]

Why is it that some places seem to be being stupid with their mask requirements in emergency situations - such as my flats saying if you're self isolating and the fire alarm goes off you must wear a mask when leaving the building, and another poster in another thread said about the same thing happening in a Scottish school?

 

[DB]

Because masks have become the country's comform blanket, and it just seems to be getting worse. The fact that there is still no evidence of them making any difference doesn't seem to be deterring their proponents.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why is it that some places seem to be being stupid with their mask requirements in emergency situations - such as my flats saying if you're self isolating and the fire alarm goes off you must wear a mask when leaving the building, and another poster in another thread said about the same thing happening in a Scottish school?

It's not "stupid".

If you consider that masks work, which is the only sensible consideration in this context because the Government says they do, then evacuations tend to result in indoor crowds, which means spread.

If this applies to you you should keep one in your pocket at all times.

It only doesn't make sense if you consider that they don't work, but this debate can't be addressed in that context because all businesses have to do their risk assessment on the basis that they do work because the Government said so - in that context that's the end of the discussion.

 

[Bantamzen]

Well, thinking about it for a moment. Consider being in a workplace and the fire alarm goes off. The standard evacuation procedures will dictate that you move to the nearest escape route as soon as possible, and you do not try to gather all your belongings. So unless a mask was readily available to reach, leaving the building without one would be a reasonable thing to do. I mean what are they going to do, send you back into a burning building because you didn't put a mask on. As @DavidB says above, masks have become the nation's comfort blanket and the root cause for some of the most stupid measures imaginable.

 

[Howardh]

Why is it that some places seem to be being stupid with their mask requirements in emergency situations - such as my flats saying if you're self isolating and the fire alarm goes off you must wear a mask when leaving the building, and another poster in another thread said about the same thing happening in a Scottish school?

Love that. "Oi...get back in the burning building for your mask..."

 

[Bletchleyite]

So unless a mask was readily available to reach, leaving the building without one would be a reasonable thing to do

If that's the rule, you must carry one (an unused disposable in a plastic bag would be sensible) in your pocket at all times so as to be able to comply.

As @DavidB says above, masks have become the nation's comfort blanket and the root cause for some of the most stupid measures imaginable.

With respect, that is utterly irrelevant. If the Government says they work, that is what companies have to use when doing their RA. The debate on efficacy is completely separate.

 

[Bantamzen]

If that's the rule, you must carry one (an unused disposable in a plastic bag would be sensible) in your pocket at all times so as to be able to comply.



With respect, that is utterly irrelevant. If the Government says they work, that is what companies have to use when doing their RA. The debate on efficacy is completely separate.

In an emergency situation you want people to move as quickly and as ordered as possible, fart-arsing around with masks whilst trying to leave safely does not sound sensible to me (and I've trained for such situations). Getting people away from a potentially serious, maybe immediate life-threatening situation is priority over the stupid masks.

 

[Andy Pacer]

I'd have thought immediate preservation of life should come before mask compliance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd have thought immediate preservation of life should come before mask compliance.

If, in that situation, one carries a mask in one's pocket at all times, it is quite possible to have both.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

If, in that situation, one carries a mask in one's pocket at all times, it is quite possible to have both.

You're not supposed to carry them in your pocket at all!

 

[Andy Pacer]

You're not supposed to carry them in your pocket at all!

Perhaps the assumption is there will be an unused one safely sealed!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps the assumption is there will be an unused one safely sealed!

Yes, a new, disposable one in a plastic bag for the specific purpose of emergencies.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Yes, a new, disposable one in a plastic bag for the specific purpose of emergencies.

Not wishing to get into a pointless debate, my final words are "as if" !

 

[Crossover]

Well, thinking about it for a moment. Consider being in a workplace and the fire alarm goes off. The standard evacuation procedures will dictate that you move to the nearest escape route as soon as possible, and you do not try to gather all your belongings. So unless a mask was readily available to reach, leaving the building without one would be a reasonable thing to do. I mean what are they going to do, send you back into a burning building because you didn't put a mask on. As @DavidB says above, masks have become the nation's comfort blanket and the root cause for some of the most stupid measures imaginable.

You may jest, but I was involved in an evacuation recently and a number of people were walking out covering their mouth with their hand (distancing was out of the window, naturally)

 

[Ianno87]

Yes, a new, disposable one in a plastic bag for the specific purpose of emergencies.

Try telling that to ladies whose attire frequently is not fitted with operable pockets....

 

[Bletchleyite]

Try telling that to ladies whose attire frequently is not fitted with operable pockets....

Try telling a lady to evacuate without picking up her handbag.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Try telling that to ladies whose attire frequently is not fitted with operable pockets....

I'm sure a professional jobsworth would try it in such situations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not wishing to get into a pointless debate, my final words are "as if" !

Only if you're using an anti-mask view to influence it. These decisions can only be made on the basis that masks work, as the Government has said so. A business cannot go against that whether they like it or not.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Only if you're using an anti-mask view to influence it. These decisions can only be made on the basis that masks work, as the Government has said so. A business cannot go against that whether they like it or not.

I am not anti mask. And I don't think the original post was specific about a business environment?

 

[Ianno87]

Try telling a lady to evacuate without picking up her handbag.

Especially, like in these 21st century times, they don't have one...

 

[pdeaves]

The pragmatic view in an emergency evacuation situation is 'grab your mask only if it is immediately to hand, concentrate on getting out', i.e. desirable but not mandatory in the emergency. Just the same as being 2m apart would be desirable but not mandatory on a fire escape stairway.

Unfortunately, in the desire to rush through new rules, pragmatism isn't always in view.

 

[Yew]

If your building takes 15 mins to evacuate in an emergency, you need a different building.

 

[185143]

Another scenario to consider is depressurisation at high altitude on an aircraft.

You don't have long before hypoxia begins to set in, hence being told to put your own oxygen mask on before helping others. So surely having to remove a mask before putting an oxygen mask on is a potentially dangerous delay in that scenario.

Granted, I doubt it happens that often.

 

[Bantamzen]

Having been in a life and death situation, one where a lot of people perished I can say with certainty that getting out as quickly as possible is a key priority. I would not even think to delay to put a ruddy mask on, and anyone trying to enforce it would be told as such. And afterwards they would be complained about.

 

[PeterC]

If your building takes 15 mins to evacuate in an emergency, you need a different building.

That would be the time for the last fire marshal to report at the assembley point. I have worked in city buildings where it took longer to walk from the fire exit to the assembley point than it did to actually get out of the building.

 

[initiation]

The pragmatic view in an emergency evacuation situation is 'grab your mask only if it is immediately to hand, concentrate on getting out', i.e. desirable but not mandatory in the emergency. Just the same as being 2m apart would be desirable but not mandatory on a fire escape stairway.

Unfortunately, in the desire to rush through new rules, pragmatism isn't always in view.

On our local facebook page, a mother was moaning that at her child's school, the kids had to immidiately leave the classroom during a firedrill and were not allowed to wait to search bags etc... for face coverings before exiting.

Utterly bizarre and shows how bad many humans are at assessing risks.

 

[Mag_seven]

A fire wardens/marshal I know at an educational establishment has confirmed that the procedures at their workplace are that the priority is to get out of the building as quickly as possible in a safe controlled manner and that the wearing of masks is secondary to that.

I'm sure the normal instruction in an emergency is that you must get out and not stop to pick up personal belongings etc - that would include a mask if you did not have it on your person at the time the alarm was sounded.

All this just indicates is how the risk of catching COVID is now regarded as being more dangerous than getting out of a burning building as quickly as possible which is clearly ludicrous.

 

[adc82140]

Going back to the OP, there's a world of difference between someone who has a high probability of being Covid positive responding to a fire alarm going off in their flats versus an office building going up with flames licking your backside. Anyone who advises mask wearing in the former situation may have a point if it is responding to a fire alarm rather than evidence of a fire, anyone challenging non mask wearing in the latter needs to give their head a wobble.

 

[Kingspanner]

All this just indicates is how the risk of catching COVID is now regarded as being more dangerous than getting out of a burning building as quickly as possible which is clearly ludicrous.
[/QUOTE]
With all due respect it reveals nothing of the sort, there is just evidence of a couple of poorly thought out and/or misunderstood instructions somewhere. the rest of the thread points to the sane majority view.

In any event this thread is another opportunity for folk to shriek about masks.

 

[kez19]

Yes, a new, disposable one in a plastic bag for the specific purpose of emergencies.

Where I work we are not allowed those ones unfortunately even in emergency it has to be the disposable ones