UK face coverings discussion

[DB]

I believe masks are used as an attempt to reduce risk, therefore a moment of un-nosing is a minor percentage change of a percentage chance.

When you apply the 100% effective 100% of the time logic then you get your response.

I am exempt but would love to wear one in the right situations but as shown it gets the same reaction so I won’t. Happy with your approach now?

But there is actually No convincing evidence that they do reduce risk...

 

[DustyBin]

But there is actually No convincing evidence that they do reduce risk...

This is the frustration. Masks were initially forced upon us and are increasingly seen by some as a key weapon in the fight against Covid-19, all based on absolutely nothing. Apart from the fact that people don’t use them correctly, it’s very common to see people wearing masks with valves in them, or plastic visors. If masks help, why is this allowed? Im going to suggest that it’s because there is no evidence whatsoever that masks are effective and are simply another attempt to be seen to be doing something, therefore anything goes.

 

[VauxhallandI]

But there is actually No convincing evidence that they do reduce risk...

Indeed but I am giving them the benefit of the doubt for the statement and it still doesn’t warrant the interaction with the perfect masker in the supermarket

 

[43066]

I am going to send a complaint when I get time, or at least ask what their policy on enforcement is. I will probably suggest that badgering exempt people who are doing their best to wear a mask is likely to have the opposite result to the one they want or expect.
Takes the p too as I witnessed various staff members taking theirs off to have a chat, one even idly swinging it round by the ear loops.

The thing that really annoys me about masks is that so many have been completely brainwashed to unquestioningly believe this disgusting unhygienic habit is somehow key to not passing germs around.

Trebor79 you have my utmost respect for trying to wear a mask even though you are exempt, but I think you should just not wear one at all. The attitude of the shopworker in this case in disgusting. I see people on trains and tube who wear them around their chin or in the ‘nose exposed’ mode, and it annoys me. I have far more respect for people not wearing them at all; whether it’s because of exemption or a refusal to comply I care not. The stance of ‘I’ll wear the damn thing, but not properly’ is the act of a coward, especially when all they have to do if challenged is say ‘I am exempt’.
There will come a tipping point. If they try to introduce wearing masks outdoors then I for one will absolutely not comply with such a measure. The evidence they do any good is not forthcoming, and the practicalities involved when it’s pouring with rain are just reason for standing up and saying NO MORE !!

What a disgusting attitude from the shop worker, who would do to remember how long the dole queue is getting. Quite frankly @trebor79 ‘s response was a lot more measured than mine would have been in the circumstances, and should certainly be followed up with a formal complaint.

As someone who is also exempt I wholeheartedly agree with @Skimpot flyer. You’ll have a lot more credibility if you neither wear nor carry face coverings on any occasion. Wearing one to pay lip service or “try your best” implies that you feel guilty about not wearing one, which absolutely *should not* be the case.

If you wear one “incorrectly” you’ll get no thanks for it. If anything you’ll attract more hostility, as people will assume you are not exempt, and ignorant as to how to wear them (not that it’s any of their business).

My attitude is very much that, as an exempt person, my legal position hasn’t changed one iota since pre Covid, and I’ll be wearing them precisely as often as I did then.

 

[bramling]

Trebor79 you have my utmost respect for trying to wear a mask even though you are exempt, but I think you should just not wear one at all. The attitude of the shopworker in this case in disgusting. I see people on trains and tube who wear them around their chin or in the ‘nose exposed’ mode, and it annoys me. I have far more respect for people not wearing them at all; whether it’s because of exemption or a refusal to comply I care not. The stance of ‘I’ll wear the damn thing, but not properly’ is the act of a coward, especially when all they have to do if challenged is say ‘I am exempt’.
There will come a tipping point. If they try to introduce wearing masks outdoors then I for one will absolutely not comply with such a measure. The evidence they do any good is not forthcoming, and the practicalities involved when it’s pouring with rain are just reason for standing up and saying NO MORE !!

To be fair the disposable masks do seem to have a habit of slipping down - and of course people aren’t supposed to touch or adjust them once on, so if it ends up below the nose then in theory that’s that, it should stay there.

Another reason not to bother at all. However I can see why people wear them below the nose - it’s a way of keeping the peace, and it shouldn’t be necessary to have to gear up for a full-scale conflict when going shopping, especially when for most people the issue is “it’s not fair” rather than any more rational reason.

 

[MattA7]

I have to say I Found this short video of a guy harassing cops for not wearing a mask quite amusing the cop certainly puts him in his place.

In the video a member of the public confronts 2 New York police officers for not wearing masks. The officer informs him that they are not required to do so if more than 6ft from someone. The second officer accuses him of overreacting to the situation

 

[43066]

I have to say I Found this short video of a guy harassing cops for not wearing a mask quite amusing the cop certainly puts him in his place.

I’m amazed he got away with that.

I was waiting for the moment where he had a gun shoved into his face, swiftly followed by his nose being buried in the floor, as they jumped on him, cuffed him and “took him in” (in the US they still have a police force rather than a “police service”).

 

[yorkie]

This is what annoys me about masks, and all the other restrictions associated with COVID-19.

Indeed; this is an authoritarian's dream.

So basically you broke the rules, got told about it and are now having a big whinge.

Given that he is exempt from wearing a face covering, I am puzzled as to what rule he broke?

I have to say I Found this short video of a guy harassing cops for not wearing a mask quite amusing the cop certainly puts him in his place.

Could you edit your post to add a text alternative (this could be a summary, description or transcript as appropriate) for anyone unable to access, see or hear the video please? Thanks

Trebor79 you have my utmost respect for trying to wear a mask even though you are exempt, but I think you should just not wear one at all....

Agreed. The mandating of masks is more about imposing authoritarianism than a necessary response to any medical or scientific need. If it was the latter, I'd say anyone who could wear one partially or part of the time should try their best to wear them.

As it is the former, then for the benefit of mental health and to avoid arguments, I would recommend people who are exempt do not wear them at all.

If anyone who is pro-mandatory masks believes people with exemptions who can wear a mask for some of the time should do so, I'd be curious to hear how they would advise such people avoid being on the receiving end of unwanted abuse, rudeness and arguments?

I've witnessed a CrossCountry guard get really angry at exposed noses (though he was fine for the person agreeing with him to have an exposed nose, which says it all!), with no attempt to engage with the passenger in a constructive way.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I think there are some people who feel a deep anger about being forced to wear something that has no proven benefit, and absolutely hate having to wear a face covering. They are filled with an unconscious self-loathing, every time they put one on, knowing deep down inside that they are doing it merely to avoid standing out from the crowd, to ‘fit-in’. Mentally, that conflict between logic and conformity is very hard to accept. So when such a person sees others doing the chin-wearing or otherwise not complying, I think that the unconscious self-loathing manifests itself in an angry outburst at another person. I lay the blame for such incidents squarely at the politicians, for mandating face coverings just to be seen to be ‘doing something’.
Of course, while we are fighting amongst ourselves, we’re not getting angry at the inept politicians, which suits them just fine...

 

[bramling]

I think there are some people who feel a deep anger about being forced to wear something that has no proven benefit, and absolutely hate having to wear a face covering. They are filled with an unconscious self-loathing, every time they put one on, knowing deep down inside that they are doing it merely to avoid standing out from the crowd, to ‘fit-in’. Mentally, that conflict between logic and conformity is very hard to accept. So when such a person sees others doing the chin-wearing or otherwise not complying, I think that the unconscious self-loathing manifests itself in an angry outburst at another person. I lay the blame for such incidents squarely at the politicians, for mandating face coverings just to be seen to be ‘doing something’.
Of course, while we are fighting amongst ourselves, we’re not getting angry at the inept politicians, which suits them just fine...

I think it’s exactly that.

 

[43066]

Of course, while we are fighting amongst ourselves, we’re not getting angry at the inept politicians, which suits them just fine...

I’m now 100% convinced that’s the whole point of the policy. There’s precisely zero science behind face coverings, but that observation misses the point. It was never about the science, it’s much more about confuse/divide/conquer. It’s working well as a strategy to deflect from this government’s incompetence.

Cummings is a clever guy, but you need him to be on your side of the argument. That worked well for me, as far as Brexit was concerned, but rather less so these days!

Ironically, you only really appreciate how smart he is, when you oppose him.

 

[Jamesrob637]

My local market (outdoor) "recommended" the wearing of face masks but I explained that although I had one on me, I'd rather not wear it outdoors. He seemed fine with that and I applied my sand hanitiser.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was waiting for the moment where he had a gun shoved into his face, swiftly followed by his nose being buried in the floor, as they jumped on him, cuffed him and “took him in” (in the US they still have a police force rather than a “police service”).

Well, quite.

However, I do believe his position is correct - if they are responsible for enforcing wearing, then they should be wearing themselves, unless legally exempt by way of a medical type exemption. Hypocrisy rarely serves law enforcement well.

 

[C J Snarzell]

How do enforcement officers deal with this then on public transport? Fines are being issued to people not wearing masks. Surely, there must be an onus on those not wearing masks to prove a valid reason as to why they are exempt?

CJ

 

[island]

My understanding of face masks in public places is that if people have genuine medical conditions that make it difficult to wear one, then they have to prove it - maybe a doctor's note. It's simply common sense and courtesy.

CJ

Your understanding is quite wrong; notes are not required and most doctors do not issue them.

 

[island]

Well, quite.

However, I do believe his position is correct - if they are responsible for enforcing wearing, then they should be wearing themselves, unless legally exempt by way of a medical type exemption. Hypocrisy rarely serves law enforcement well.

I don’t know what the law is in the USA, but here in England on-duty police officers are blanket exempt from mask requirements as far as the law is concerned.

(Individual force policies may of course vary.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t know what the law is in the USA, but here in England on-duty police officers are blanket exempt from mask requirements as far as the law is concerned.

Which is a fact to which I am strongly opposed.

If customers are required to wear masks in any venue, staff should be required to wear them on the same basis. Police Officers would come under "staff" anywhere they operate.

 

[bramling]

How do enforcement officers deal with this then on public transport? Fines are being issued to people not wearing masks. Surely, there must be an onus on those not wearing masks to prove a valid reason as to why they are exempt?

CJ

There isn’t that much enforcement going on with regards to transport, though it seems TFL are upping it a bit which is no doubt at the bequest of Khan, who seems obsessed with masks (I suppose he has to have one contribution to all this...).

Secondly not many fines are being issued. I can only assume people when questioned are replying with “I haven’t got one” or “I don’t want to”.

 

[Domh245]

Secondly not many fines are being issued. I can only assume people when questioned are replying with “I haven’t got one” or “I don’t want to”.

Or alternatively, the easy (and can't be pursued further) "I have an exemption"

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I saw someone on a train on Friday who, at first glance, appeared to have their mask slung around their chin. On second looks, it actually was a cloth/visor combo, something like this

which leaves the lower half of the face visible. Less dystopian, but does it comply with the letter of the law?

 

[trainophile]

Which is a fact to which I am strongly opposed.

If customers are required to wear masks in any venue, staff should be required to wear them on the same basis. Police Officers would come under "staff" anywhere they operate.

Surely the police are working mostly in outdoor locations when on duty (except when they are in the police station of course). If they go indoors it will be as a result of being called to sort some problem out, and mask wearing may not be high on their list of priorities at the time.

 

[bramling]

Surely the police are working mostly in outdoor locations when on duty (except when they are in the police station of course). If they go indoors it will be as a result of being called to sort some problem out, and mask wearing may not be high on their list of priorities at the time.

I had an officer call round my house recently as part of house to house enquiries about a crime which had happened locally, no mask.

To be honest I would have perhaps expected him to have offered “would you like me to wear one?”.

I had my boiler serviced recently and the engineer said that it’s been a “total nightmare”, some people have been going into their gardens whilst he’s been working.

 

[trainophile]

Presumably you could have had your conversation with the policeman on your doorstep (at an appropriate distance) if you didn't want him coming in maskless?

I think a lot of people need to get a grip, and I know that has been the theme of this thread!

 

[HSTEd]

I had my boiler serviced recently and the engineer said that it’s been a “total nightmare”, some people have been going into their gardens whilst he’s been working.

The electrician stepwise rewiring my house wears one, didn't ask him too or anything.

Had to take a break outside after exertions with an armoured cable.

 

[island]

Yes, I expect the majority of fines are going to people who fail the attitude test.

 

[43066]

Hypocrisy rarely serves law enforcement well.

100% agree.

But surely what’s even worse is the attempted enforcement of demonstrably ineffective and nonsensical laws, which have negative externalities.

Had to take a break outside after exertions with an armoured cable.

As railway enthusiasts, I’m sure we’ve all binge-watched MindHunter .

 

[Kingspanner]

I challenge any of the self justifying contributors to this thread to produce evidence that face masks are not effective.

I shall produce evidence to the contrary, and yes I know how hard it is to get proper randomised trials in epidemiological settings and that I am linking to a preprint which was yet to be peer reviewed.

I open the bidding with this paper from the Royal Society and British Academy https://royalsociety.org/-/media/po...a=en-GB&hash=A22A87CB28F7D6AD9BD93BBCBFC2BB24
which states

"Cloth face masks and coverings for the general public are effective in improving: i) source protection, i.e., reduced virus transmission from the wearer when they are of optimal material and construction and fitted correctly; and ii) wearer protection, i.e., reduced rate of infection of those who wear them".

And if you don't like that there is the huge meta study reported in the Lancet here https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
which supports social distancing preferably at 2 metres and also says that

"The use of face masks was protective for both health-care workers and people in the community exposed to infection, with both the frequentist and Bayesian analyses lending support to face mask use irrespective of setting".

 

[island]

The first article has the qualifications “when they are of optimal material and construction and fitted correctly”. The second article studied “surgical masks, N95 masks, and twelve to sixteen layer cotton masks”, and 26 of its 29 underlying studies were of medical settings.

I put it to you that these limitations and qualifications render any attempt to read-across from the above two articles to daily use of badly fitted cut up t-shirts and bargain basement masks bought online futile.

 

[DustyBin]

I challenge any of the self justifying contributors to this thread to produce evidence that face masks are not effective.

I shall produce evidence to the contrary, and yes I know how hard it is to get proper randomised trials in epidemiological settings and that I am linking to a preprint which was yet to be peer reviewed.

I open the bidding with this paper from the Royal Society and British Academy https://royalsociety.org/-/media/po...a=en-GB&hash=A22A87CB28F7D6AD9BD93BBCBFC2BB24
which states "Cloth face masks and coverings for the general public are effective in improving: i) source protection, i.e., reduced virus transmission from the wearer when they are of optimal material and construction and fitted correctly; and ii) wearer protection, i.e., reduced rate of infection of those who wear them".

And if you don't like that there is the huge meta study reported in the Lancet here https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
which supports social distancing preferably at 2 metres and also says that "The use of face masks was protective for both health-care workers and people in the community exposed to infection, with both the frequentist and Bayesian analyses lending support to face mask use irrespective of setting".

@island has responded to the challenge in the same way I suspect any ‘anti-masker’ would, i.e. to be effective, masks have to be of the correct type, properly fitted and properly used. Your evidence in fact reinforces the view that the government’s face covering mandate is a waste of time, and I’d add to that potentially harmful.

 

[43066]

I challenge any of the self justifying contributors to this thread to produce evidence that face masks are not effective.

I shall produce evidence to the contrary, and yes I know how hard it is to get proper randomised trials in epidemiological settings and that I am linking to a preprint which was yet to be peer reviewed.

I open the bidding with this paper from the Royal Society and British Academy https://royalsociety.org/-/media/po...a=en-GB&hash=A22A87CB28F7D6AD9BD93BBCBFC2BB24
which states "Cloth face masks and coverings for the general public are effective in improving: i) source protection, i.e., reduced virus transmission from the wearer when they are of optimal material and construction and fitted correctly; and ii) wearer protection, i.e., reduced rate of infection of those who wear them".

And if you don't like that there is the huge meta study reported in the Lancet here https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
which supports social distancing preferably at 2 metres and also says that "The use of face masks was protective for both health-care workers and people in the community exposed to infection, with both the frequentist and Bayesian analyses lending support to face mask use irrespective of setting".

Is that “evidence”? I don’t think so.

I think it’s just a rehash of the same old, tired studies, which have been referred to on here over and over again, and demonstrate that masks work in limited clinical/controlled settings, coupled with the usual awkward Segway into saying that face coverings must therefore also work in more general settings?