UK face coverings discussion

[yorkie]

They aren't, but they are a mitigation which allows 2m to be reduced to 1m+ (there are others too).

The WHO state:

for areas of widespread transmission, with limited capacity for implementing control measures and especially in settings where physical distancing of at least 1 metre is not possible – such as on public transport, in shops or in other confined or crowded environments – WHO advises governments to encourage the general public to use non-medical fabric masks.

Unfortunately in the UK we tend to try to impose additional restrictions, in order to be seen to be going above and beyond any sensible measures done elsewhere.

 

[DB]

Unfortunately in the UK we tend to try to impose additional restrictions, in order to be seen to be going above and beyond any sensible measures done elsewhere.

Indeed, and it's certainly not new.

A lot of people them blame the EU for over-the-top measures, even when it's actually the UK government (as it usually is).

 

[Bletchleyite]

And face coverings will still make little to no difference because the pupils are not distanced at all.

That's totally untrue. They will make a difference at any spacing.

 

[yorkie]

That's totally untrue. They will make a difference at any spacing.

If this was true, why are countries like the Netherlands not mandating face coverings?

 

[DB]

That's totally untrue. They will make a difference at any spacing.

Any evidence that they do is weak - so it's 'might', not 'will'. And good luck in preventing five year olds from fiddling with them all the time!

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

That's totally untrue. They will make a difference at any spacing.

But they are not a replacement for distancing, so why is 2m physical distancing still recommended even with face coverings (in enclosed spaces)?

Wearing a face covering is tolerable for a 15 minute bus journey to school, or a 5 minute stint in the shop at lunchtime. But wearing one for 6+ hours, in a stifling hot, poorly ventilated classroom (they can't use fans anymore), trying to focus on learning?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If this was true, why are countries like the Netherlands not mandating face coverings?

Because like many on here they believe the negatives outweigh the positives, perhaps?

But they are not a replacement for distancing, so why is 2m physical distancing still recommended even with face coverings (in enclosed spaces)?

Wearing a face covering is tolerable for a 15 minute bus journey to school, or a 5 minute stint in the shop at lunchtime. But wearing one for 6+ hours, in a stifling hot, poorly ventilated classroom (they can't use fans anymore), trying to focus on learning?

Because 2m distancing is better. But it's clear 2m distancing isn't going to be feasible in schools, so alternatives are needed.

We're going into winter. It's not going to be "stifling hot", and if it is turn the heating off.

 

[Ken H]

Because like many on here they believe the negatives outweigh the positives, perhaps?



Because 2m distancing is better. But it's clear 2m distancing isn't going to be feasible in schools, so alternatives are needed.

We're going into winter. It's not going to be "stifling hot", and if it is turn the heating off.

and then some kid gets hypoxia.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

and then some kid gets hypoxia.....

Masks will categorically not cause you to get hypoxia (and there are enough videos out there from doctors proving this with an oxygen meter). Unless you have a medical condition that is already seriously affecting your oxygen levels (in which case (a) you already know about it because it will be affecting your daily life e.g. you'll be hyperventilating walking up a hill, and (b) you are exempt) any feeling of suffocation from a mask is just that, a feeling. A panic attack, if you may (which itself is an exemption!)

They also categorically will not cause permanent damage except for specific medical conditions which again you'll know if you have, again enough doctors have confirmed that.

They are unpleasant and uncomfortable, I agree, and they need to be removed if someone needs to lip-read you in which case you need to step back so there's 2m between you. But for those without a condition which exempts them anyway, that is all they are and any suggestions beyond that are complete hyperbole.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

We're going into winter. It's not going to be "stifling hot", and if it is turn the heating off.

I have just spent the past 6 years in a school (the building was only opened 10 years ago!). The heating system is appalling. Teachers can't control the temperatures in their rooms, it's all underfloor controlled centrally. There is air-con in any room with a suite of computers, that's it - so 10 out of 100-odd rooms across the school.

It's is ridiculously hot in the summer because of the poor ventilation, but also ridiculously hot in the winter because the janitors can never seem to get the heating set "just right" - one end of the school could be a sauna meanwhile the other side could be a fridge (Bozza might be found here, mind ).

I understand this is just one example, but I'm sure there are many others who have experienced similar!

Face coverings in schools are just point-blank unsuitable. I'm sorry.

 

[westv]

I noticed this from a news item from another thread

Coronavirus: Just one in six back in the office in cities as Boris Johnson's 'return to work' plea ignored

Figures compiled for Sky News show worker footfall in cities was just 17% of pre-lockdown levels in the first two weeks of August.

news.sky.com

London mayor Sadiq Khan told Sky News that businesses in the city centre faced "an existential threat" and a targeted package of Government support was required if the city was to avoid mass unemployment when the furlough scheme ends in the autumn.

He also said the Government should consider mandating the wearing of masks in busy outdoor spaces to increase the confidence of commuters and tourists to return to the capital.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly what "busy outdoor spaces" are there in London at the moment? From what I'm hearing it's pretty dead.

 

[farleigh]

Exactly what "busy outdoor spaces" are there in London at the moment? From what I'm hearing it's pretty dead.

Tourist spots are quite busy but the city is pretty dead. Need to tell people to get back to work rather than fussing about masks.

 

[adc82140]

When did Mr Khan get his degree in epidemiology? It has been universally said by all experts in the field that the risk if outdoor transmission is negligible to zero. We'll ignore what the Spanish are doing, as they though imprisoning all children for months was a good idea.

 

[BJames]

Khan has been pushing for face covering usage outside in London for ages, I've seen on his twitter page. It's infuriating, but it's making him seem like an idiot, as clearly being outdoors the risk of transmission is much lower. Otherwise, how does he explain Bournemouth's crowds over 2 months ago, with people travelling from various parts of the country, not leading to a spike?

 

[DB]

Khan has been pushing for face covering usage outside in London for ages, I've seen on his twitter page. It's infuriating, but it's making him seem like an idiot, as clearly being outdoors the risk of transmission is much lower. Otherwise, how does he explain Bournemouth's crowds over 2 months ago, with people travelling from various parts of the country, not leading to a spike?

As with Sturgeon, it's political.

 

[big_rig]

As with Sturgeon, it's political.

This. It seemed to take about five minutes after the 'victory' of making them mandatory on transport to setting out on the new goal of making them mandatory outside as well. I hate to break it to the Mayor but I think the number of tourists and office workers being effectively a rounding error at the moment compared to six months ago is the issue and making masks mandatory at street level is unlikely to fundamentally change that.

 

[island]

I noticed this from a news item from another thread

Coronavirus: Just one in six back in the office in cities as Boris Johnson's 'return to work' plea ignored

Figures compiled for Sky News show worker footfall in cities was just 17% of pre-lockdown levels in the first two weeks of August.

news.sky.com

More complete nonsense.

 

[Huntergreed]

Up in Glasgow today, it’s quite disheartening to see young children of the age of 5 in face masks, who clearly find them very intimidating and have no reason why they need them other than that they mean “danger”.

I am, however, happy to hear (or I suppose not hear!) that the “no food and drink” announcement is no longer being played in Central station.

 

[HSTEd]

Honest question, has policy changed?

Am in Manchester and just went to a supermarket - used to be that only very rare people would not be wearing masks.
Now something like half.

 

[Huntergreed]

Honest question, has policy changed?

Am in Manchester and just went to a supermarket - used to be that only very rare people would not be wearing masks.
Now something like half.

Policy hasn’t changed, just people have lost the motivation to continue living under these endless “restrictions”, and rightly so

 

[sjpowermac]

Let the hysterics commence...

The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued guidance saying children over the age of 12 should wear masks, in line with recommended practice for adults in their country or area.

Coronavirus pandemic: Children aged 12 and over should wear masks - WHO

The UN health body says there is some evidence teenagers can infect others in the same way as adults.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[adc82140]

This isn't anything new. The rule has always been that under 12s are exempt in England, but teenagers have to wear them the same as adults

 

[sjpowermac]

This isn't anything new. The rule has always been that under 12s are exempt in England, but teenagers have to wear them the same as adults

Fair enough, but it has appeared on the BBC News website this evening, perhaps as a precursor to masks in schools.

I don’t recall having previously seen the following guidance for staff working in schools, though I’m happy to stand corrected:

For teachers, the WHO says: "In areas where there is widespread transmission, all adults under the age of 60 and who are in general good health should wear fabric masks when they cannot guarantee at least a one-metre distance from others.

"This is particularly important for adults working with children who may have close contact with children and one another."

Adults aged 60 or over, or those with underlying health conditions, should wear medical masks, it says.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Fair enough, but it has appeared on the BBC News website this evening, perhaps as a precursor to masks in schools.

I don’t recall having previously seen the following guidance for staff working in schools, though I’m happy to stand corrected:

Note: "widespread transmission"

What's defined as "widespread transmission"?

FWIW I lost most credit in the WHO when they didn't deny changing their advice on face coverings due to political pressure, moreso now that they're prepared to compare SARS-Cov-2 with the Spanish Flu.

 

[sjpowermac]

Note: "widespread transmission"

What's defined as "widespread transmission"?

FWIW I lost most credit in the WHO when they didn't deny changing their advice on face coverings due to political pressure, moreso now that they're prepared to compare SARS-Cov-2 with the Spanish Flu.

Yes, I did note ‘wide spread transmission’.

I suspect the definition of ‘wide spread transmission’ will be whatever the government wants it to be.

 

[yorkie]

What are the rights of school staff if a school, or Government, mandates it? Can they be sacked if they refuse to wear them?

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

I suspect the definition of ‘wide spread transmission’ will be whatever the government wants it to be.

Indeed, and "when they cannot guarantee at least a one-metre distance from others" will likely be quietly adjusted to "a two metre distance from others".

 

[sjpowermac]

What are the rights of school staff if a school, or Government, mandates it? Can they be sacked if they refuse to wear them?

That’s actually a very good question. Whatever the technicalities, I suspect that schools would simply make it tremendously awkward for anyone not complying.

The policy at my own school, as it currently stands, is that staff and students may wear masks if they wish.

I suspect that claiming an exemption might prove difficult.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2020 ==

Indeed, and "when they cannot guarantee at least a one-metre distance from others" will likely be quietly adjusted to "a two metre distance from others".

Given the unpredictability of some students, I honestly don’t think 1 metre or 2 metres makes much odds in this instance.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Given the unpredictability of some students, I honestly don’t think 1 metre or 2 metres makes much odds in this instance.

Very true...

I genuinely hope kids don't have to wear them in schools. I can envisage them causing a significant distraction thus having a negative impact on learning massively.