UK face coverings discussion

[Huntergreed]

How likely is it that the cinemas will be checking - during the movie - whether people are still wearing a covering?
You can hardly run pre-film messaging, imploring people to switch off mobiles (or put them on silent), so as to not ruin other people’s enjoyment of the movie.... then switch on torches or put the house lights up, to check compliance on face coverings !!!

I think cinemas have night vision cameras installed so they can see if people are illegally filming the movie, and the same may well apply to them checking masks (someone may be asked to watch the screens and challenge (or potentially call the police) on anyone who isn't abiding.

I was under the impression that at many TOC's the guard is simply in the back cab watching CCTV to check mask compliance and can and will alert the BTP to any concerns on route (although I may, and hope, I am wrong on that one)

 

[Bletchleyite]

The thing to remember is that we don't have about droplet mass transfer, we care about actual resultant infections. I say this as someone with a Ph.D in droplet mass transfer, who as used similar lasers and high-speed cameras in research applications.

Given the unknowns and knowns, concerning ourselves with droplet mass transfer is a good way to deal with infection transmission. This may change over time.

I was under the impression that at many TOC's the guard is simply in the back cab watching CCTV to check mask compliance and can and will alert the BTP to any concerns on route (although I may, and hope, I am wrong on that one)

On most stock staff can't view the CCTV, it's just recorded for evidence. On Pendolinos they can though.

 

[furlong]

The law states that face coverings are to be worn in hospitals.

Got a reference for that? I thought it was merely guidance and not something written into law.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Got a reference for that? I thought it was merely guidance and not something written into law.

The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings in a Relevant Place) (England) Regulations 2020

These Regulations require members of the public to wear face coverings whilst inside a relevant place specified in the Regulations in England to protect against the risks to public health arising from coronavirus, except in certain limited cases.

www.legislation.gov.uk

7. Premises (other than registered pharmacies) providing wholly or mainly medical or dental services, audiology services, chiropody, chiropractic, osteopathic, optometry or other medical services including services relating to mental health.

Though why not pharmacies I have no idea.

 

[furlong]

Though why not pharmacies I have no idea.

That's an old list of exemptions.

 

[adc82140]

I think cinemas have night vision cameras installed so they can see if people are illegally filming the movie, and the same may well apply to them checking masks (someone may be asked to watch the screens and challenge (or potentially call the police) on anyone who isn't abiding.

I would love to hear the police response. I reported a hit and run last week, complete with reg number and description of driver, and was basically told I was wasting their time. As leaving the scene of an accident is most definitely an offence, I doubt they'd be bothered if someone who may have a good reason is not wearing a mask in a cinema.

 

[Huntergreed]

France has just mandated masks in all workplaces apart from individual offices provided that nobody else is in the room. Could that be coming over here?

 

[Yew]

France has just mandated masks in all workplaces apart from individual offices provided that nobody else is in the room. Could that be coming over here?

I'd like to remind French people of the interesting work by Joseph-Ignace Guillotin.

 

[adc82140]

I'd like to remind French people of the interesting work by Joseph-Ignace Guillotin.

Did you know it was invented in Yorkshire? Not a lot of people know that.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Just watched the Scottish COVID briefing. At least 3 questions relating to face coverings in schools - most making the point that face coverings need to be worn in shops/transport/other indoor places by children (5+ in Scotland remember), but not in schools where they are of similar environment.

The interim CMO said words to the effect that the use of face coverings when prevalence is so low has negligible impact.

The hint I got from Sturgeon was that she wanted school pupils to have an as close to normal school life as possible, which is reassuring, but face coverings on the whole are "under constant review" - what ever that means.

France has just mandated masks in all workplaces apart from individual offices provided that nobody else is in the room. Could that be coming over here?

Must be seen to be doing something. In reality, it means distancing in all workplaces will be out of the door and the "unsafe" brigade will all of a sudden consider their workplace extremely safe. It'd be hilarious if we weren't in the midst of a pandemic right now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

France has just mandated masks in all workplaces apart from individual offices provided that nobody else is in the room. Could that be coming over here?

I would expect so, yes. All indoor places where there are people outside your household, probably.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2020 ==

That's an old list of exemptions.

So it is. It looks like hospitals etc were actually removed! Have they gone into another law?

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Well this comes as no surprise.

Coronavirus: Fewer supermarket visits after face mask rules introduced

Industry data published by Kantar suggests that mandatory face coverings in stores have "taken some getting used to".

news.sky.com

Shoppers made two million fewer trips to the supermarket than expected in the week after face mask rules came into force, according to latest industry figures.

Data company Kantar, which compiled the report, said it suggested the introduction of mandatory face coverings in stores "has taken some getting used to".

The report said that "the public may need time to adjust to the new regulations, and they now have to plan ahead for every shopping trip".

However...

But other possible reasons given for lower numbers of shopping visits in recent weeks included local lockdowns and a decline in stockpiling.

 

[MikeWM]

I think cinemas have night vision cameras installed so they can see if people are illegally filming the movie, and the same may well apply to them checking masks (someone may be asked to watch the screens and challenge (or potentially call the police) on anyone who isn't abiding.

They *could*, but I seriously doubt they *would*, as they didn't particularly want to have to do this in the first place. If word gets around of cases of films being stopped so the police can question someone who turns out to be legitimately exempt anyway, then people will just stop going, which isn't exactly in their interest.

They were totally uninterested when I went on Sunday, though I did ask the ticket checker if there were any issues with my being bare-faced, and he said it was fine. Seemed, at this point at least, to be a similar approach to supermarkets (ie. assume people are exempt by default).

 

[Bletchleyite]

How do you have to "plan ahead" for a shopping trip? I just put one in my pocket every time I go out, it's just added one thing to "keys wallet phone".

 

[DB]

Well this comes as no surprise.

Coronavirus: Fewer supermarket visits after face mask rules introduced

Industry data published by Kantar suggests that mandatory face coverings in stores have "taken some getting used to".

news.sky.com

However...

And supermarkets are likely the least-affected shops - figures for those selling non-essential items could perhaps show any trend even more clearly.

 

[Domh245]

How do you have to "plan ahead" for a shopping trip? I just put one in my pocket every time I go out, it's just added one thing to "keys wallet phone".

I took plan ahead in that context to mean that they were more thoroughly planning out their shopping lists to avoid making repeat trips.

Also, good to see that you are treating your mask(s) hygienically as one would expect..

 

[MikeWM]

I would expect so, yes. All indoor places where there are people outside your household, probably.

It would involve yet another reverse ferret from the government, not that that should surprise anyone. Their current advice remains

You should also wear a face covering in indoor places not listed here where social distancing may be difficult and where you will come into contact with people you do not normally meet.

(emphasis mine)

In any event, the usual modus operandii with this government appears to be to allow things to restart fairly normally and then require masks a few weeks later, in order to confuse people as much as possible. So probably expect them mandatory in schools from around late September, and in offices [1] once more offices have reopened and people are back at work.


[1] no doubt with an exception for politicians, in the same way the smoking ban didn't cover the Palace of Westminster...

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

You should also wear a face covering in indoor places not listed here where social distancing may be difficult and where you will come into contact with people you do not normally meet.

If they're going for full-time schooling, then kids will be in contact with the same people daily (i.e. the school cohort). Likewise, for offices, you're likely to be in contact with the same people daily (the workforce).

It's a different story on public transport, of course, because if you get on 4 buses a day (e.g. 2 to work, 2 back) the chances of you coming across the exact same people each day are pretty negligible, especially as flexi-working is becoming the norm.

 

[duncanp]

And supermarkets are likely the least-affected shops - figures for those selling non-essential items could perhaps show any trend even more clearly.

I think the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are only just starting to become apparent.

Once it is realised that the number of people who are not going shopping because they don't want to wear these wretched face nappies is greater than those who "..feel safer.." by wearing them, then no doubt "..the science..." will be adapted to show that it is now OK to make masks face nappies optional in shops again.

The sooner the better, as far as I am concerned.

 

[Bletchleyite]

face nappies

You are presumably aware that this childish terminology basically completely discredits your argument?

 

[MikeWM]

You are presumably aware that this childish terminology basically completely discredits your argument?

I don't use it myself, but it seems a fairly good description. We excrete things from our bodies in various ways - a mask, just like a nappy, impedes that and keeps the things we're trying to get rid of close to our skin.

 

[Journeyman]

You are presumably aware that this childish terminology basically completely discredits your argument?

I find your views on masks terrifyingly authoritarian and unreasonable, but I completely agree with you here. Derogatory terms just make those of us with genuine issues regarding masks all look like idiots.

 

[Ianno87]

I don't use it myself, but it seems a fairly good description. We excrete things from our bodies in various ways - a mask, just like a nappy, impedes that and keeps the things we're trying to get rid of close to our skin.

Just dipped back in and thread really has gone completely loopy.

Should be re-named "anti-maxxers Echo Chamber"

 

[MikeWM]

Just dipped back in and thread really has gone completely loopy.

Was there something factually wrong with what I said? I already pointed out I don't use the term myself.

 

[duncanp]

You are presumably aware that this childish terminology basically completely discredits your argument?

Not as far as I am concerned it doesn't.

There are many people who don't like wearing the wretched things, and if the government is ever so foolish as to try and mandate them everywhere outside the home, I think there will be mass civil disobedience.

 

[Ianno87]

Was there something factually wrong with what I said? I already pointed out I don't use the term myself.

A mask is nothing like a nappy, for starters. If you saw the contents of my two year olds' nappy a few hours after he's eaten some sweetcorn, for example.

I make no apologies for the mental image of having that in your own face. It assists with showing how your analogy is completely absurd.

 

[DB]

Not as I am concerned it doesn't.

I agree - I can't see any problem with terms of contempt for masks, such as that and 'muzzles'.

 

[Ianno87]

I agree - I can't see any problem with terms of contempt for masks, such as that and 'muzzles'.

They are only 'muzzles' if you have a problem frequently going around biting people.

This thread is ridiculous.

 

[DB]

They are only 'muzzles' if you have a problem frequently going around biting people.

This thread is ridiculous.

Some people just don't get satire, clearly...

 

[43066]

I've just had someone turn up at work wearing a beekeepers hat. I'm sure the holes in the net are bigger than covid droplets, but in the eyes of the law it's a face covering.

Brilliant.

They should be given some sort of reward.