UK face coverings discussion

[AdamWW]

It hasn't up to now and infection rate lower than at lockdown and it didn't collapse then. Think the collapse in NHS is actually unlikely and scaremongering to try and get people to comply. Perhaps you'd prefer total collapse of economy as that'll be the way it goes? If it does come back then it does we cannot keep going the way we are. I'm more concerned about society breaking down than this virus.

Sure the infection rate is much lower than at lockdown. But if we drop restrictions it's almost certainly going to go up very fast, wiping out all the gains from the lockdown.

Here is a document (used as input to SAGE) making it clear that the heath system collapsing is a very real danger.

 

[island]

I hope you (or they) reported him. London bus drivers have been instructed not to enforce this ridiculous policy.

If he keeps getting out of his cab and betrating people he’ll do it to the wrong person sooner or later.

I did no such thing; I try to mind my own business as much as possible.

 

[Richard Scott]

Sure the infection rate is much lower than at lockdown. But if we drop restrictions it's almost certainly going to go up very fast, wiping out all the gains from the lockdown.

Here is a document (used as input to SAGE) making it clear that the heath system collapsing is a very real danger.

What did we gain from lockdown? Idea was to allow NHS time to build up resources not to get rid of virus. Now we are totally stuck as lots of people think we can get rid of it. The only gain from lockdown is a damaged economy, divided nation, chance to wear face coverings and no light at the end of the tunnel, what success!

 

[A Challenge]

The evidence may be lower quality, it is there.

If evidence of a lower quality is producing an opposite result to the good quality evidence, I'd rather use the good quality evidence - talk about selective use of evidence...

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Sure the infection rate is much lower than at lockdown. But if we drop restrictions it's almost certainly going to go up very fast, wiping out all the gains from the lockdown.

Here is a document (used as input to SAGE) making it clear that the heath system collapsing is a very real danger.

The infection rate at lockdown was indeed much higher than now. What you’re failing to grasp is that the reported infection rate at lockdown was probably massively understated, as there was virtually no testing going on. So the reduction to today’s levels is much greater than the statistics show.
As for the warning about the health system collapsing, if you’re somebody suffering from any of a multitude of other non-Coronavirus conditions, it already has collapsed. As has been said by many other posters, more people will end up dying prematurely from treatable non-Covid illnesses than will die from the disease. Access to support for mental health conditions was already under-resourced and this is only going to get far worse as more people feel isolated and marginalised as people* confront them for not wearing a face-covering.

*Perhaps, in tribute to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, who publicly advocated the shaming of non-wearers, we should refer to such individuals as Dicks?

 

[43066]

I did no such thing; I try to mind my own business as much as possible.

Fair enough. I hasten to add that’s normally my approach, too. However I’m now reaching a stage where if I see a jobsworth abusing someone for not wearing a mask, I will intervene. Bus drivers have been explicitly instructed not to enforce mask wearing, so the driver you encountered was clearly using the current situation as an excuse to be a bully.

Perhaps those who profoundly disagree with mask wearing should consider abandoning masks altogether, as a sign of solidarity with those who are unable to wear them.

 

[AdamWW]

The infection rate at lockdown was indeed much higher than now. What you’re failing to grasp is that the reported infection rate at lockdown was probably massively understated, as there was virtually no testing going on. So the reduction to today’s levels is much greater than the statistics show.

No, I'm aware of that. But it doesn't matter. If dropping restrictions means that infections start to rise exponentially, lower levels just mean it takes a bit longer to reach a given level. But given the nature of exponential growth, not that long.

As for the warning about the health system collapsing, if you’re somebody suffering from any of a multitude of other non-Coronavirus conditions, it already has collapsed. As has been said by many other posters, more people will end up dying prematurely from treatable non-Covid illnesses than will die from the disease. Access to support for mental health conditions was already under-resourced and this is only going to get far worse as more people feel isolated and marginalised as people* confront them for not wearing a face-covering.

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration but yes I do realise the problems.

But I can't see how filling hospitals up with Covid patients is going to help.

I suppose we could do that just be refusing anyone hospital care for Covid, but the idea doesn't appeal to me, and if you let coronavirus loose in the population you're going to have large staff absence issues (illness + shielding) and a good chance of infecting already ill patients.

 

[talldave]

Fair enough. I hasten to add that’s normally my approach, too. However I’m now reaching a stage where if I see a jobsworth abusing someone for not wearing a mask, I will intervene. Bus drivers have been explicitly instructed not to enforce mask wearing, so the driver you encountered was clearly using the current situation as an excuse to be a bully.

Perhaps those who profoundly disagree with mask wearing should consider abandoning masks altogether, as a sign of solidarity with those who are unable to wear them.

No need to abandon, I never started.

 

[Richard Scott]

No, I'm aware of that. But it doesn't matter. If dropping restrictions means that infections start to rise exponentially, lower levels just mean it takes a bit longer to reach a given level. But given the nature of exponential growth, not that long.



I think that's a bit of an exaggeration but yes I do realise the problems.

But I can't see how filling hospitals up with Covid patients is going to help.

I suppose we could do that just be refusing anyone hospital care for Covid, but the idea doesn't appeal to me, and if you let coronavirus loose in the population you're going to have large staff absence issues (illness + shielding) and a good chance of infecting already ill patients.

So your solution is to stay stuck in this rut for years allowing mental health issues to rise, economy to go further down the pan? We have to get on with life, simple as that. We will struggle for a while with staff illness etc but that happens with flu, we just have to stop living the lie we are at the moment. We're not even trying to find out if NHS will cope etc, we're still pussy footing around with underutilised resources such as hospitals, doctor's surgeries etc. and worrying that numbers are up by 50 extra infections a day compared to two weeks ago, we need to get a grip! Seems the only winner here is the mask industry and probably solicitors as they'll find anything that has a no win no fee!

 

[AdamWW]

So your solution is to stay stuck in this rut for years allowing mental health issues to rise, economy to go further down the pan? We have to get on with life, simple as that. We will struggle for a while with staff illness etc but that happens with flu, we just have to stop living the lie we are at the moment. We're not even trying to find out if NHS will cope etc, we're still pussy footing around with underutilised resources such as hospitals, doctor's surgeries etc. and worrying that numbers are up by 50 extra infections a day compared to two weeks ago, we need to get a grip!

Why do you think "We're not even trying to find out if NHS will cope etc"?

(It's not true).

 

[Richard Scott]

Why do you think "We're not even trying to find out if NHS will cope etc"?

(It's not true).

Do you honestly think I want to read a 79 page document? If you could summarise for me I'd appreciate it as assume you've read it cover to cover and digested all the detail? No I don't think we are, I know people who work in the NHS and they agree that they are not anywhere near capacity. I take it you're happy with living like this because I'm not and you may get the impression I'm extremely frustrated by it because I am. If they can give me some solid fact and not scare mongering I may be inclined to be more on board.

 

[43066]

Do you honestly think I want to read a 79 page document? If you could summarise for me I'd appreciate it as assume you've read it cover to cover and digested all the detail? No I don't think we are, I know people who work in the NHS and they agree that they are not anywhere near capacity. I take it you're happy with living like this because I'm not and you may get the impression I'm extremely frustrated by it because I am. If they can give me some solid fact and not scare mongering I may be inclined to be more on board.

I’m fed up with all the empty threats about the NHS being overwhelmed. As someone pointed out earlier (possibly yourself) it already might as well have been, in terms of every condition other than this stupid virus!

The cold facts are that the Nightingale hospitals were never used. That suggests they the lockdown measures were rather more effective than necessary. There is capacity in the system to take on many more patients and that’s what may need to happen if cases rise as we open up. But open up we must!

No need to abandon, I never started.

Good for you - likewise.

 

[AdamWW]

Do you honestly think I want to read a 79 page document? If you could summarise for me I'd appreciate it as assume you've read it cover to cover and digested all the detail?

I don't know.

I summarised it here

I take it you're happy with living like this because I'm not and you may get the impression I'm extremely frustrated by it because I am. If they can give me some solid fact and not scare mongering I may be inclined to be more on board.

I'm not happy but it doesn't mean there is an easy way out. The document offers a lot of facts about what's needed to protect the health system.

I’m fed up with all the empty threats about the NHS being overwhelmed. As someone pointed out earlier (possibly yourself) it already might as well have been, in terms of every condition other than this stupid virus!

The cold facts are that the Nightingale hospitals were never used. That suggests they the lockdown measures were rather more effective than necessary. There is capacity in the system to take on many more patients and that’s what may need to happen if cases rise as we open up. But open up we must!

Right - and filling the hospitals up again with Covid patients isn't going to let us catch up with the backlog of non Covid issues.

The cold facts are, according to the document I mention above, that the Nightingale hospitals can only be staffed by removing staff from other hospitals. So not in fact that useful.

 

[trebor79]

Right - and filling the hospitals up again with Covid patients isn't going to let us catch up with the backlog of non Covid issues.

The backlog isn't being caught up with in any case. Might as well fill it up with COVID cases.

 

[bramling]

Fair enough. I hasten to add that’s normally my approach, too. However I’m now reaching a stage where if I see a jobsworth abusing someone for not wearing a mask, I will intervene. Bus drivers have been explicitly instructed not to enforce mask wearing, so the driver you encountered was clearly using the current situation as an excuse to be a bully.

I'm sure there's a lot of people using this as an opportunity to clamp down on personal pet hates. Don't like people hotdesking in the office? Solution - "Quarantine" the room (whatever that means!). Don't like cyclists? Solution - put a banner up "cyclists stop panting virus through our village". Et cetera.

Perhaps those who profoundly disagree with mask wearing should consider abandoning masks altogether, as a sign of solidarity with those who are unable to wear them.

I'm pretty much already at that stage.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

No, I'm aware of that. But it doesn't matter. If dropping restrictions means that infections start to rise exponentially, lower levels just mean it takes a bit longer to reach a given level. But given the nature of exponential growth, not that long.
I think that's a bit of an exaggeration but yes I do realise the problems.
But I can't see how filling hospitals up with Covid patients is going to help.

I suppose we could do that just be refusing anyone hospital care for Covid, but the idea doesn't appeal to me, and if you let coronavirus loose in the population you're going to have large staff absence issues (illness + shielding) and a good chance of infecting already ill patients.

Why do you assume that larger infection numbers will have dire results in terms of people needing hospitalisation?
There are unknown numbers of people who are carrying coronavirus but are asymptomatic; many people who have tested positive and had the virus have recovered without needing interventions in hospital.
There is capacity in the underused Nightingale hospitals, and any further easing of restrictions giving back of our freedoms would, you might expect, be preceded by creating more such capacity, just in case. At least, that’s what a competent government would do....

The mental health issues are real and not a figment of my imagination. I have a sister who has coped with many life events and is mentally - in normal times - very strong. She has been shielding at home (because of a medical issue that puts her in a vulnerable group) since 29 March, not meeting any close family or friends, and is not coping with the isolation at all well, even though her husband has continued to work. She’s a naturally outgoing person and I notice a marked deterioration in her demeanour when we talk on the phone. If someone who is that mentally strong is not coping, how bad is it for those with pre-existing mental health issues?
It is well documented that past recessions have led to sharp increases in suicide rates, for example, see this BBC article

Recession 'led to 10,000 suicides' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27796628

The economic crisis in Europe and North America led to more than 10,000 extra suicides, according to figures from UK researchers.
A study, published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, showed "suicides have risen markedly".

In 2018, there were 10.8 deaths from suicide per 100,000 of population in the U.K.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_Kingdom

The government is implementing regional Coronavirus-led restrictions based sometimes on an increase of just 10 cases per 100,000 of population, on the basis that the number has grown by 25%, when it’s still only 50 cases, not 40, per 100k of population. Cases. Not deaths.
We are told we are heading for a world recession the like of which we have never seen before, so if unemployment reaches the levels of the most pessimistic predictions, maybe 3x the levels ever seen previously, it’s not a great stretch to imagine a doubling or more of suicide deaths. This would equate to over 6,000 excess deaths from suicide whilst the government farts about, worrying more about what petty restrictions on our lives they can think up next, rather than the destruction their ineptitude has wreaked on us.
Note to Boris: ‘It’s the economy, stupid‘

 

[Bletchleyite]

"Widened mask usage slightly"? I think you'll find we've increased it massively. As for their effect, we are now in the start of the period where this might be measured given that the median incubation period is 5.2 days. So if there is an uptick in cases in the coming days & weeks, it is possible that masks might actually be having a negative effect.

Yes, this is possible. Though it does need to be taken into account that for cases to increase as they have R must be over 1 and so you will get exponential growth. If however you get a *steeper* exponential growth, yes, masks may well be to blame. The only problem there, though, is that masks seem to be making people distance less, and so *that* may be to blame, not the actual masks, so that needs sorting out.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So what do you all think? Should people consider wearing shields and goggles too (in addition to a mask), or not?

Because that is to protect the individual rather than others, people should wear those things if they wish to and not if they do not.

Masks are different - "I wear my mask to protect you, you wear yours to protect me" - it is pretty much purely altruistic.

 

[farleigh]

Because that is to protect the individual rather than others, people should wear those things if they wish to and not if they do not.

Masks are different - "I wear my mask to protect you, you wear yours to protect me" - it is pretty much purely altruistic.

Bletchleyite - you really are not being altruistic by wearing a mask if you are asking me to wear one to protect you. Altruism is far more selfless than that. If you were being truly altruistic you would wear one but not expect others to wear them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bletchleyite - you really are not being altruistic by wearing a mask if you are asking me to wear one to protect you. Altruism is far more selfless than that. If you were being truly altruistic you would wear one but not expect others to wear them.

Fair point, but I think that is a technicality. The point is that it is a measure that everyone who can needs to do to help everyone else, and not simply a way for an individual to protect themselves.

 

[43066]

Fair point, but I think that is a technicality. The point is that it is a measure that everyone who can needs to do to help everyone else, and not simply a way for an individual to protect themselves.

Except that there’s still no real evidence they make any difference. So really people wearing them aren’t being altruistic at all, they’re just blindly following orders.

 

[farleigh]

Except that there’s still no real evidence it makes any difference. So really people wearing them aren’t being altruistic at all, they’re just following orders.

I really do not want anybody to wear a mask to protect me. I am happy to take my chances.

 

[al78]

Yes, this is possible. Though it does need to be taken into account that for cases to increase as they have R must be over 1 and so you will get exponential growth. If however you get a *steeper* exponential growth, yes, masks may well be to blame. The only problem there, though, is that masks seem to be making people distance less, and so *that* may be to blame, not the actual masks, so that needs sorting out.

Risk compensation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Risk compensation is a theory which suggests that people typically adjust their behavior in response to the perceived level of risk, becoming more careful where they sense greater risk and less careful if they feel more protected.[2] Although usually small in comparison to the fundamental benefits of safety interventions, it may result in a lower net benefit than expected.[n 1]

By way of example, it has been observed that motorists drove faster when wearing seatbelts and closer to the vehicle in front when the vehicles were fitted with anti-lock brakes. There is also evidence that the risk compensation phenomenon could explain the failure of condom distribution programs to reverse HIV prevalence and that condoms may foster disinhibition, with people engaging in risky sex both with and without condoms."

 

[al78]

Except that there’s still no real evidence they make any difference. So really people wearing them aren’t being altruistic at all, they’re just blindly following orders.

If it is a choice between wearing a mask and a £100 fine, I'll wear the mask. If it is a choice between wearing a mask and being prevented from accessing my local supermarket, I'll wear a mask. I don't like the rule, but if breaking the rule results in worse consequences for me than obeying it, then I will follow it (and wearing a mask is a trivial inconvenience for me). That is only logical.

 

[farleigh]

Fair point, but I think that is a technicality. The point is that it is a measure that everyone who can needs to do to help everyone else, and not simply a way for an individual to protect themselves.

I disagree. I think that the majority of people are wearing them because they have to in order to visit shops etc.

 

[43066]

I really do not want anybody to wear a mask to protect me. I am happy to take my chances.

Same for me. Quite frankly I find seeing people muzzled up deeply
anxiety inducing. I’m convinced most wearers don’t understand the rationale behind them and believe they are wearing them for personal protection.

If it is a choice between wearing a mask and a £100 fine, I'll wear the mask. If it is a choice between wearing a mask and being prevented from accessing my local supermarket, I'll wear a mask. I don't like the rule, but if breaking the rule results in worse consequences for me than obeying it, then I will follow it (and wearing a mask is a trivial inconvenience for me). That is only logical.

I quite agree that it’s a matter of individual choice, and it is going to be less hassle simply to conform. I’ve been visiting the supermarket and other shops, travelling around on public transport etc. and haven’t been fined or denied access to anything yet.

 

[Huntergreed]

Same for me. Quite frankly I find seeing people muzzled up deeply
anxiety inducing. I’m convinced most wearers don’t understand the rationale behind them and believe they are wearing them for personal protection.

Indeed, they're horrible things. Make your skin horribly dry, make breathing really warm and unpleasant, make your face itchy and uncomfortable, and make you really self-conscious in my opinion. Without exaggeration, I really find it depressing that I'm being forced, against my will, to wear these in many places and feel very uncomfortable that the government are insisting on mandating these at all, which is always going to lead to self-appointed vigilantes being horrible to those exempt and for those exempt feeling excluded and perhaps being refused entry to shops (happened multiple times from what I've seen!). The whole thing is truly depressing and the fact it's here to stay for months, it's really hard to find the motivation to go out and enjoy things when to go shopping or to enjoy one of my favourite hobbies (rail travel), I'm facing extensive periods of discomfort, it's really not good

I must ask, are the government really acting in the best interests of the greatest majority? (which is the whole premise upon which our demoracy is built) or are they pandering to those who scream the loudest on social media, favouring the demographic of their voters, and simply trying to play politics (look 'safe') in order to increase their own popularity?

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Because that is to protect the individual rather than others, people should wear those things if they wish to and not if they do not.

Masks are different - "I wear my mask to protect you, you wear yours to protect me" - it is pretty much purely altruistic.

Fair point, although I'm pretty sure that if everybody decided to wear the face shield and goggles in addition the mask, the risk of disease would start to become even lower as everybody would be well protected.

Indeed, a person who recently caught a flight in the USA just tested positive for the virus despite the fact he was wearing a mask and gloves, and consequently suggested that goggles would be a good idea, as apparently Coronavirus / COVID-19 can even spread through your eyes.

But for now, in the nice summer season, the face shields/goggles are no use unless you are a healthcare worker (or working in any other high risk environments that require full PPE). Masks are enough for now, because viruses can't survive in hot weather, compared to cold weather. However, once the winter approaches, I believe face shields/goggles will then become a good idea (in addition to N95 masks, which btw I believe they are the only ones that REALLY work), as viruses survive in cold therefore making the risk of infection higher.

Btw, speaking about the type of mask. I currently have N95s and I wear them everytime I need to go indoors, such as supermarkets. I believe they are the only type of face masks that are really effective in trying to decrease the risk of infection. Homemade masks don't work as well as an N95 mask. If there are bus enthusiasts out there reading this, it's basically like comparing a low floor bus wheelchair ramp with a step entrance coach wheelchair lift. Wheelchair ramps work better than lifts as they speed up boarding/alighting times.

 

[43066]

The whole thing is truly depressing and the fact it's here to stay for months, it's really hard to find the motivation to go out and enjoy things when to go shopping or to enjoy one of my favourite hobbies (rail travel), I'm facing extensive periods of discomfort, it's really not good

Completely agree, I feel exactly the same. I would suggest you are more than likely to be exempt (under the “extreme distress” category), and that you are therefore perfectly entitled to get on with things without wearing a mask.

I’m damned if I’m going to have to choose between cowering at home or walking around wearing a muzzle on Matt Hancock’s say so. Life is too bloody short.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Completely agree, I feel exactly the same. I would suggest you are more than likely to be exempt (under the “extreme distress” category), and that you are therefore perfectly entitled to get on with things without wearing a mask.

I’m damned if I’m going to have to choose between cowering at home or walking around wearing a muzzle on Matt Hancock’s say so. Life is too bloody short.

If you have problems that prevent you from wearing a mask, then you are legally exempt. Just make the staff/drivers aware by downloading and showing all the exemption messages.