Cloth masks, scarves and bandanas to be 'encouraged' with no compulsion

[AM9]

Indeed, it is a strange situation.

However, I cannot see how it's any worse, infact I'd say it's preferable to getting public transport users not to use public transport at all.

One of the 'Focuses' surveyed public transport users and found that two thirds would only be prepared to travel on it if face mask wearing were made compulsory.
Which I think, whatever the mixed messages from the experts are, will be the mechanism by which it will become mandatory by peer pressure, at least for those who want to use public transport.

Sorry, something went wrong here and i seemto have posted effectively the same message twice.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It strikes me as something that would be definitely "worth a go", with substantially reduced distancing in these settings, e.g. using half the seats rather than only 10%.

 

[AM9]

It strikes me as something that would be definitely "worth a go", with substantially reduced distancing in these settings, e.g. using half the seats rather than only 10%.

I think part of thge problem is that some, having heard that masks of the type that government advice says we should wear don't protect the wearer, switched off then because that was their only concern. The concept of wearing a mask for the protection of others seems to be not worth their trouble. That's why I thinkl that it will take peer pressure to force their mandated use in environments such as public transport. Once that pressure rises enough, the authorities concerned will be able to carry that through without fear of blame for getting it wrong.

 

[westv]

That's why I think that it will take peer pressure to force their mandated use in environments such as public transport. Once that pressure rises enough, the authorities concerned will be able to carry that through without fear of blame for getting it wrong.

Where will the peer pressure come from though? I read the other day that very few of the current passengers are wearing masks. I'm not sure this would change at all when numbers rise.

 

[yorksrob]

Which I think, whatever the mixed messages from the experts are, will be the mechanism by which it will become mandatory by peer pressure, at least for those who want to use public transport.

There does seem to be a consensus emerging among experts that mask wearing helps to stop the spread where social distancing isn't possible. Which is why I think it's preferable to have as near as possible everyone with them, than a few people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There does seem to be a consensus emerging among experts that mask wearing helps to stop the spread where social distancing isn't possible. Which is why I think it's preferable to have as near as possible everyone with them, than a few people.

Because they protect others, not the wearer, I can't contemplate why they are not being made mandatory in those specific settings. There is the issue of keeping them from the NHS, but the NHS doesn't want home-made masks made of T-shirts and the likes.

 

[ashkeba]

Because they protect others, not the wearer, I can't contemplate why they are not being made mandatory in those specific settings. There is the issue of keeping them from the NHS, but the NHS doesn't want home-made masks made of T-shirts and the likes.

Small shops here are already selling surgical masks at £5 each. If there are not enough for NHS and homes yet, why is this not banned?

 

[LowLevel]

Latest thing that train guards are being asked to compile stats on here is how many passengers wearing face coverings - maybe a move towards compulsion if the numbers aren't high enough? Also taking photos of the saloons where possible to show how distancing is working in practice.

 

[yorksrob]

Small shops here are already selling surgical masks at £5 each. If there are not enough for NHS and homes yet, why is this not banned?

Are they definitely medical spec ?

Latest thing that train guards are being asked to compile stats on here is how many passengers wearing face coverings - maybe a move towards compulsion if the numbers aren't high enough? Also taking photos of the saloons where possible to show how distancing is working in practice.

Interesting development !

 

[NorthOxonian]

One of the 'Focuses' surveyed public transport users and found that two thirds would only be prepared to travel on it if face mask wearing were made compulsory.
Which I think, whatever the mixed messages from the experts are, will be the mechanism by which it will become mandatory by peer pressure, at least for those who want to use public transport.

Sorry, something went wrong here and i seemto have posted effectively the same message twice.

But this doesn't just go one way.

I wouldn't want to use public transport if I had to wear a mask. I think it could easily lead to a massive stigma around public transport, and I'd be concerned about how long such measures lasted for. More generally, I think more people than are willing to admit it are concerned about the move towards masks - face coverings are inherently sinister, at least in our culture. They also don't inspire feelings of safety for many people - they make it seem like everyone is a threat, and so I'm really concerned that it'll become part of our culture permanently. When you see pictures from countries where masks are the norm, I think it looks genuinely dystopian.

Yes, I realise that a lot of people won't share this view. But I think we have to consider both sides of the argument - masks are not a panacea and have real downsides too.

 

[yorksrob]

But this doesn't just go one way.

I wouldn't want to use public transport if I had to wear a mask. I think it could easily lead to a massive stigma around public transport, and I'd be concerned about how long such measures lasted for. More generally, I think more people than are willing to admit it are concerned about the move towards masks - face coverings are inherently sinister, at least in our culture. They also don't inspire feelings of safety for many people - they make it seem like everyone is a threat, and so I'm really concerned that it'll become part of our culture permanently. When you see pictures from countries where masks are the norm, I think it looks genuinely dystopian.

Yes, I realise that a lot of people won't share this view. But I think we have to consider both sides of the argument - masks are not a panacea and have real downsides too.

Probably true - but I think being "discouraged" to go anywhere at all is even more dystopian.

Personally I can't see mass facemask wearing lasting longer than the percieved threat of the virus. In the meantime, any stopgap that facilitates beople going about their business is preferable.

 

[nlogax]

If a short-term requirement for using public transport for leisure is having to wear a mask or face covering, then fine. Count me in. I properly don't care if people think the look is dystopian - I fully intend to make use of trains again at some point in the future for non-essential travel.

 

[Bantamzen]

But this doesn't just go one way.

I wouldn't want to use public transport if I had to wear a mask. I think it could easily lead to a massive stigma around public transport, and I'd be concerned about how long such measures lasted for. More generally, I think more people than are willing to admit it are concerned about the move towards masks - face coverings are inherently sinister, at least in our culture. They also don't inspire feelings of safety for many people - they make it seem like everyone is a threat, and so I'm really concerned that it'll become part of our culture permanently. When you see pictures from countries where masks are the norm, I think it looks genuinely dystopian.

Yes, I realise that a lot of people won't share this view. But I think we have to consider both sides of the argument - masks are not a panacea and have real downsides too.

Exactly this. As an absolutely desperate measure, asking people to wear masks were it may not be possible to distance might be OK for a short term plan. However where this all starts to fall down is why masks are even part of the equation. It has long been forgotten that in some Eastern Asian countries, it is a social protocol to wear masks when displaying symptoms of an illness, such as sneezing or coughing. As with the policy here this is not to protect the wearer, but those around them. However with covid people are being asked to wear them regardless of symptoms, because there may be a short window prior to any symptoms where it may be possible to transmit. However if the person not showing signs of illness isn't coughing or sneezing, spitting or licking the windows, then the risk of transmission remains incredibly small, as it would with other illnesses that transmit in similar ways.

So this then begs the question, when can we stop wearing them? Let's say it becomes law to wear them on public transport, what will be the trigger to stop wearing them, because after all if we are wearing them to prevent a very small chance of transmission if not displaying symptoms, and given that the virus is never going to disappear, then its hard to see what would allow a relaxation of such a law. Indeed it is probably one of the reasons why the government hasn't gone down this line, because there are serious implications.

As @NorthOxonian rightly points out a situation like this could lead to long term stigmatisation of public transport, and because culturally we are not used to seeing people with masks when other relaxations kick in but public transport users continue to have to wear masks, it will potentially discourage people from ever using it again. This will lead to a shrinking of the networks, and invariably loss of jobs. Perhaps in time we will move to a cultural shift as in Eastern Asia, where people wear them when they are suffering, or better still we become more tolerant of people staying at home & being able to have confidence that we won't get disciplined or sacked. But I think in the short term any compulsion of mask wearing / face covering must be very limited, be under constant review and have a clearly defined end game.

 

[AM9]

But this doesn't just go one way.

I wouldn't want to use public transport if I had to wear a mask. I think it could easily lead to a massive stigma around public transport, and I'd be concerned about how long such measures lasted for. More generally, I think more people than are willing to admit it are concerned about the move towards masks - face coverings are inherently sinister, at least in our culture. They also don't inspire feelings of safety for many people - they make it seem like everyone is a threat, and so I'm really concerned that it'll become part of our culture permanently. When you see pictures from countries where masks are the norm, I think it looks genuinely dystopian.

Yes, I realise that a lot of people won't share this view. But I think we have to consider both sides of the argument - masks are not a panacea and have real downsides too.

But for most* I think wearing a face mask only when close to others, for a few months or maybe even weeks is a very small price to pay to mutually protect others even if there are experts arguing for and against. Obviously some aren't even prepared to go that far in the UK, so in certain circumstances, they may need to deny access for those thaat refuse.
* of course there are some (but in the big picture very few) who might have genuine psychiatric or physical health reasons why they cannot wear face masks, but that isn't a good enough reason to do nothing.

 

[yorksrob]

Exactly this. As an absolutely desperate measure, asking people to wear masks were it may not be possible to distance might be OK for a short term plan. However where this all starts to fall down is why masks are even part of the equation. It has long been forgotten that in some Eastern Asian countries, it is a social protocol to wear masks when displaying symptoms of an illness, such as sneezing or coughing. As with the policy here this is not to protect the wearer, but those around them. However with covid people are being asked to wear them regardless of symptoms, because there may be a short window prior to any symptoms where it may be possible to transmit. However if the person not showing signs of illness isn't coughing or sneezing, spitting or licking the windows, then the risk of transmission remains incredibly small, as it would with other illnesses that transmit in similar ways.

So this then begs the question, when can we stop wearing them? Let's say it becomes law to wear them on public transport, what will be the trigger to stop wearing them, because after all if we are wearing them to prevent a very small chance of transmission if not displaying symptoms, and given that the virus is never going to disappear, then its hard to see what would allow a relaxation of such a law. Indeed it is probably one of the reasons why the government hasn't gone down this line, because there are serious implications.

As @NorthOxonian rightly points out a situation like this could lead to long term stigmatisation of public transport, and because culturally we are not used to seeing people with masks when other relaxations kick in but public transport users continue to have to wear masks, it will potentially discourage people from ever using it again. This will lead to a shrinking of the networks, and invariably loss of jobs. Perhaps in time we will move to a cultural shift as in Eastern Asia, where people wear them when they are suffering, or better still we become more tolerant of people staying at home & being able to have confidence that we won't get disciplined or sacked. But I think in the short term any compulsion of mask wearing / face covering must be very limited, be under constant review and have a clearly defined end game.

In terms of legislation, you can enact it so that it has to be extended at regular periods.

At some stage in the future, this virus will be percieved as less of a risk. It has happenned with all previous pandemics.

 

[Bantamzen]

In terms of legislation, you can enact it so that it has to be extended at regular periods.

At some stage in the future, this virus will be percieved as less of a risk. It has happenned with all previous pandemics.

But that will need some clear definition, otherwise there will always be people lobbying the government to keep the measures "just in case". Currently we are told we are holding our breath for a second wave, but what's to stop there being a third or fourth wave? So there absolutely has to be an end game that is clear & precise. Otherwise we risk public transport becoming the mode only for "the unclean".

 

[yorksrob]

But that will need some clear definition, otherwise there will always be people lobbying the government to keep the measures "just in case". Currently we are told we are holding our breath for a second wave, but what's to stop there being a third or fourth wave? So there absolutely has to be an end game that is clear & precise. Otherwise we risk public transport becoming the mode only for "the unclean".

Yes, that is a fair point.

Perhaps it would be when social distancing ends ? I say this as it seems to be a concrete point on the Government's five stage plan.

 

[AM9]

But that will need some clear definition, otherwise there will always be people lobbying the government to keep the measures "just in case". Currently we are told we are holding our breath for a second wave, but what's to stop there being a third or fourth wave? So there absolutely has to be an end game that is clear & precise. Otherwise we risk public transport becoming the mode only for "the unclean".

All emergency legislation has review events, 'just in case' it needs to be extended. If there is a second wave, then it would be a folly to not take precautions for an impending third wave just because t6 months earlier some people weren't expecting it. As far as lobbying goes, there are always people doing that, - it's how our legislature works. I'm no supporter of this administration, either politically or morally, but I accept that a duly elected government can launch legislation as it sees fit, at the risk of parliament diluting or even rejecting it. Just because any particular law doesn't suit me, there's littlwe that I can do except use my vote at the next opportunity.

 

[xc170]

One of the 'Focuses' surveyed public transport users and found that two thirds would only be prepared to travel on it if face mask wearing were made compulsory.

Probably the same people that have said they are too scared to go back to work. Nothing to do with being paid 80% of ones wages to sit at home of course...

I know I won't be travelling by train if masks are made compulsory.

 

[greyman42]

Is this wearing of masks just aimed at the commuter market or for longer journeys? I am sure someone must of brought this up before, but what do you do when you want something to drink or eat?

 

[Bantamzen]

All emergency legislation has review events, 'just in case' it needs to be extended. If there is a second wave, then it would be a folly to not take precautions for an impending third wave just because t6 months earlier some people weren't expecting it. As far as lobbying goes, there are always people doing that, - it's how our legislature works. I'm no supporter of this administration, either politically or morally, but I accept that a duly elected government can launch legislation as it sees fit, at the risk of parliament diluting or even rejecting it. Just because any particular law doesn't suit me, there's littlwe that I can do except use my vote at the next opportunity.

When I talk about review events for this I am talking weekly or at the very latest bi-weekly. Mask wearing is not something we as a society are used to, and quite frankly should not get used to. It, like social distancing should only ever remain a short term measure used as an exception not as a rule.

Is this wearing of masks just aimed at the commuter market or for longer journeys? I am sure someone must of brought this up before, but what do you do when you want something to drink or eat?

The current guidance (note guidance, not instruction) is that masks should be considered where distancing might prove difficult. So if you rock up on a Northern Line tube and the carriages are getting full, then this is when it might be considered prudent. But if you are stood on an empty platform and an empty train pulls in, then quite honestly there is no need.

 

[GB]

Small shops here are already selling surgical masks at £5 each. If there are not enough for NHS and homes yet, why is this not banned?

Are they medical grade and what defines medical grade anyway?

We have been issued disposable 3 ply masks at work (50 each to start with), not because work wants us to wear them but because the infrastructure owner has decided all staff/contractors on their land must wear them. I don't know if they are medical grade or not but they have been easy to source by all accounts so I don't quite buy the argument that it hinders the NHS.

 

[greyman42]

When I talk about review events for this I am talking weekly or at the very latest bi-weekly. Mask wearing is not something we as a society are used to, and quite frankly should not get used to. It, like social distancing should only ever remain a short term measure used as an exception not as a rule.



The current guidance (note guidance, not instruction) is that masks should be considered where distancing might prove difficult. So if you rock up on a Northern Line tube and the carriages are getting full, then this is when it might be considered prudent. But if you are stood on an empty platform and an empty train pulls in, then quite honestly there is no need.

Fair enough. I get the impression though that some people would like to see them made compulsory on all trains and all walks of life.

 

[LowLevel]

Fair enough. I get the impression though that some people would like to see them made compulsory on all trains and all walks of life.

We are now being asked to wear them openly as guards whenever in view of the public on board trains to encourage them to do the same.

I cannot see this continuing for longer than necessary. It is amazing how difficult it makes it to communicate. You can talk mostly normally albeit slightly muffled but it isn't unusual to require a couple of attempts to be understood - more people than I realised are at least a bit hard of hearing and not being able to see your lips makes life difficult.

I find it quite tolerable (in fact it even has several advantages) but when we return to being more customer service focused I can't see it remaining longer than it absolutely has to.

Anecdotally more passengers are doing it and they do seem more at ease when they see me as the uniformed rep doing it as well - people who perhaps half heartedly have a mask round their neck pull it up properly when they see you.

 

[ashkeba]

Are they definitely medical spec ?

They purport to be, but I haven't bought them or tested them. They may be those Turkish ones that failed testing or the Chinese fakes delivered to the Netherlands.

Because of my illness, I have covered my mouth in public with a scarf for many years. I never knew some people in this country thought face scarves dystopian. Strange!

 

[yorksrob]

They purport to be, but I haven't bought them or tested them. They may be those Turkish ones that failed testing or the Chinese fakes delivered to the Netherlands.

Because of my illness, I have covered my mouth in public with a scarf for many years. I never knew some people in this country thought face scarves dystopian. Strange!

Perhaps a little unfamiliar, rather than dystopian.

What we have now is dystopian, albeit I understand the need. I'd far rather cover my face and be able to travel than not.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Out of curiousity - when did people stop carrying gas masks around in WW2 ?

And as for metal helmets issued to WW2 train crews ? (amusing story about a West Wales train crew in the Swansea Blitz , who when they really needed them realised they had left them on a Castle Class about a month before - so they ducked under the tender for safety)

Just a bit of levity here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fair enough. I get the impression though that some people would like to see them made compulsory on all trains and all walks of life.

I would like to see them compulsory in indoor public settings for now. I think it is foolhardy not to try something so simple and low-cost (free, if you make your own from old rags) that now seems to be meeting with success elsewhere, to see if it can help us get cases even lower. The problem with them being optional is that they are worn to protect others, not yourself - the reason being that they more effectively stop larger droplets near your mouth than when they have aerosolised on reaching someone a short distance away.

As the emergency laws are being reviewed every 3 weeks, if we tried them for 3 weeks a clear effect on cases should be visible by the end of that period, and if they made no difference the law could be rescinded.

 

[sheff1]

Latest thing that train guards are being asked to compile stats on here is how many passengers wearing face coverings - maybe a move towards compulsion if the numbers aren't high enough?

TOCs should have no business asking staff to monitor the number of people wearing face coverings.

* of course there are some (but in the big picture very few) who might have genuine psychiatric or physical health reasons why they cannot wear face masks, but that isn't a good enough reason to do nothing.

The government have advised asthmatic people not to wear face masks. Asthma UK states over 5 million people in the UK (1 in 12) are receiving treatment for asthma. Hardly "very few".

.. more people than I realised are at least a bit hard of hearing and not being able to see your lips makes life difficult.

Many people, myself included, find it much harder to understand what is being said in places with background noise (e.g. trains) if they can't see the speaker's lips. If someone with a face covering said something to me I would have to move my head closer to them to make out what they were saying - which rather goes against the idea of social distancing.

 

[AM9]

... The government have advised asthmatic people not to wear face masks. Asthma UK states over 5 million people in the UK (1 in 12) are receiving treatment for asthma. Hardly "very few". ...

1 in 12 is a few, and given that many of those would be shielded or too unwell to travel into work, the number on trains is probably an even smaller proportion of the passenger numbers.