19th July Lockdown Easing - Observations and Compliance

[Green tractor]

All the nexus of this new society - tests, distancing, masks, vaccinating those at negligable risk from the disease, and now vaccine passports - are dependent on this shift. Equally much of what we previously valued in society - personal contact, large events, spontaneity, freedom - is dependent on reversing it. And those who continue to wear masks are, in effect, doubling down on the shift, making it less and less likely over time that it will be reversed.

Make no mistake how big a shift this is - two years ago if people were constantly checking if they were ill and taking 'precautions' against giving a stranger an illness they had no sypmtoms of and probably don't have, we would have called them neurotic, or paranoid, or OCD, or even said they had Munchausens' disease. And that society, for all its many faults, was a lot better than the one we have now.

We have been vaccinating children against flu for a few years, not for their own benefit, but to slow the spread to protect the vulnerable.

 

[Bantamzen]

We have been vaccinating children against flu for a few years, not for their own benefit, but to slow the spread to protect the vulnerable.

Oh dear me.....

 

[Failed Unit]

We have been vaccinating children against flu for a few years, not for their own benefit, but to slow the spread to protect the vulnerable.

Children really? Didn’t know that? I get harassed every year to take a flu jab. Never do, but I seems impossible to get off the list.

 

[Darandio]

We have been vaccinating children against flu for a few years, not for their own benefit, but to slow the spread to protect the vulnerable.

Completely brainwashed. Vaccinating children against flu was always primarily to protect them, not others. That was always a secondary benefit. I know this for certain, i've still got leaflets provided by the school for my youngest over the last 3/4 years.

In 2019 the NHS child flu vaccine page on the website has this opening paragraph.

The children's flu vaccine is offered as a yearly nasal spray to young children to help protect them against flu.

Flu can be a very unpleasant illness for children, with potentially serious complications, including bronchitis and pneumonia.

Any mention of the secondary benefit about protecting others was tucked away miles down the page, it wasn't that important. Today the same webpage has moved it up as part of the opening paragraph with the addition of....

Children spread flu easily. Vaccinating them also protects others who are vulnerable to flu, such as babies and older people.

I wonder why they did that..........

 

[MikeWM]

We have been vaccinating children against flu for a few years, not for their own benefit, but to slow the spread to protect the vulnerable.

Of course this societal change didn't just land on our doorstep in March 2020 entirely out of nowhere, though it accelerated incredibly rapidly over those few weeks and has been cemented in - by considerable force - since.

I firmly believe it is totally unethical and immoral to persuade/nudge/cajole anyone to undergo a medical procedure of negligible benefit - and non-zero risk - simply for the 'benefit of others'. (If they choose to do so - fine. It's great that people are willing to donate blood or bone marrow or kidneys. But that is altruistic on their part, and should never be 'nudged' or coerced or forced).

In 2019 the NHS child flu vaccine page on the website has this opening paragraph.

Any mention of the secondary benefit about protecting others was tucked away miles down the page, it wasn't that important. Today the same webpage has moved it up as part of the opening paragraph with the addition of....

I wonder why they did that..........

Interesting spot, thanks. Unsurprising but disturbing.

 

[Eyersey468]

Quite.

Those damned “Look into his eyes” ads trying to convince us leaving the house would kill Grandpa were replaced literally a month later with the ad of happy, smiling, cheerful friends meeting up in a park showing us it’s “now safe” to meet up outdoors. For many, I imagine the damage was already done.

I agree, the look them in the eye adverts were disgusting. Whoever sanctioned them should be ashamed of themselves

 

[35B]

Of course this societal change didn't just land on our doorstep in March 2020 entirely out of nowhere, though it accelerated incredibly rapidly over those few weeks and has been cemented in - by considerable force - since.

I firmly believe it is totally unethical and immoral to persuade/nudge/cajole anyone to undergo a medical procedure of negligible benefit - and non-zero risk - simply for the 'benefit of others'. (If they choose to do so - fine. It's great that people are willing to donate blood or bone marrow or kidneys. But that is altruistic on their part, and should never be 'nudged' or coerced or forced).

I would suggest there's a fundamental difference between donations of the sort you describe, and a procedure like vaccination. The impact on the individual and the risk/benefit balance are so completely different as to falsify the analogy. In a donation, the action is entirely altruistic as I can gain no benefit from donating bone marrow or a kidney; in being vaccinated, I receive a direct personal benefit which offers an order of magnitude more benefit to me than risk.

Even if I accepted the analogy, I also fail to understand how anyone is to be able to act altruistically in this way without being persuaded to do so - somewhere, somehow, they have to be informed of what these things are, and why they're beneficial. Taking your comment at face value, it appears as though it is unethical and immoral for the National Blood Transfusion Service to advertise blood donation sessions, as that advert is a form of nudge or persuasion. A society in which it is considered immoral to advocate for something that is good for society as a whole would be a very poor society indeed.

 

[MikeWM]

I would suggest there's a fundamental difference between donations of the sort you describe, and a procedure like vaccination. The impact on the individual and the risk/benefit balance are so completely different as to falsify the analogy. In a donation, the action is entirely altruistic as I can gain no benefit from donating bone marrow or a kidney; in being vaccinated, I receive a direct personal benefit which offers an order of magnitude more benefit to me than risk.

That is not the case however with Covid in anyone under the age of 18. (I would argue much higher than that, but that's more debateable. But under 18 the evidence is very clear. Indeed the JCVI said that themselves only a few weeks ago).

Even if I accepted the analogy, I also fail to understand how anyone is to be able to act altruistically in this way without being persuaded to do so - somewhere, somehow, they have to be informed of what these things are, and why they're beneficial. Taking your comment at face value, it appears as though it is unethical and immoral for the National Blood Transfusion Service to advertise blood donation sessions, as that advert is a form of nudge or persuasion. A society in which it is considered immoral to advocate for something that is good for society as a whole would be a very poor society indeed.

'Informed' is very different from 'nudged'. Only one of those things emerges from experiments and behavioural scientists.

 

[greyman42]

I agree, the look them in the eye adverts were disgusting. Whoever sanctioned them should be ashamed of themselves

I was surprised that anyone was naive enough to take them seriously.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Mask compliance is slowly decreasing around Manchester but a few are still wearing them. I don't generally unless in a situation where I might feel unsafe.

 

[philosopher]

I did see a foreign school group yesterday evening on London’s South Bank, the first time I had seen such since March 2020. London’s South Bank usually is very popular with foreign school groups.

 

[RPI]

I have young children and they will not be getting a covid vaccine if it opens up to younger children, I'm absolutely not an antivaxx as I've had both my jabs and my children have had the flu vaccine, I'm more comfortable with the flu vaccine for two reasons, a) for children its a live vaccine squirted up their nose and b) Flu can be a lot more harmful for kids than covid.

Bit back on track, mask use is definitely decreasing, although I'm exempt i never had a problem before popping one on to go into a shop for 2 minutes as that wouldn't effect my condition, but now I just won't, but I do feel uneasy going into some places wondering what others will say, I had to go into a fishing tackle shop yesterday to get crab bait (for the kids, honest guv), and most customers had masks and I didnt even have one with me, thankfully the shop keeper was walking around maskless and there were no signs at all, he clearly wasn't bothered but its going to take a long time for people to get used to it and those of us who can't stand another second of these horrible things around take the lead, I find the best thing particularly whilst I'm at work on trains is having a big smile and it totally takes the wind out of the sails of the mask lovers!

 

[35B]

That is not the case however with Covid in anyone under the age of 18. (I would argue much higher than that, but that's more debateable. But under 18 the evidence is very clear. Indeed the JCVI said that themselves only a few weeks ago).



'Informed' is very different from 'nudged'. Only one of those things emerges from experiments and behavioural scientists.

JCVI didn’t say no benefit to under 18s, they said insufficient evidence about harms.

As for the semantics of advertising, it’s also been experimented on extensively - it’s largely where “nudge” comes from. I still fail to see why trying to persuade someone to do something altruistic is unethical or immoral.

 

[seagull]

Went out for lunch to a lovely independent riverside pub/restaurant today.

100% of the staff wearing a voice muffler - bizarrely even those who were stationed permanently outdoors looking after the customers choosing to sit outside.
0% of the customers wearing a smile concealer.

 

[Class 33]

A number of the small independent retailers still keeping a face mask policy, and some even additionally keeping (un)-social distancing measures. A lot of charity shops and vets doing the same too. And I notice Specsavers are still keeping these measures too. Despite it being over 2 weeks now since the legal requirement of these measures in shops or whatever places. One wonders how much longer these places intend on keeping these measures? A few more weeks? A few more months? Or indefinitely?!

 

[Bikeman78]

Went out this morning before work. Picked up some tickets from Surbiton station - everyone in masks. Grabbed a coffee - everyone in masks except one of the baristi. Went to the local Co-op - everyone in masks.

I see no problem with people wearing them if they want to. It's no drama and each to their own. However I am slightly surprised that (18 month) old habits die this hard.

It varies from place to place. Loads not wearing masks at Liverpool Street and on trains departing from there. The 1918 Paddington to Swansea is quite full because the 1848 was cancelled but under half the people that I can see have a mask.

 

[Huntergreed]

A number of the small independent retailers still keeping a face mask policy, and some even additionally keeping (un)-social distancing measures. A lot of charity shops and vets doing the same too. And I notice Specsavers are still keeping these measures too. Despite it being over 2 weeks now since the legal requirement of these measures in shops or whatever places. One wonders how much longer these places intend on keeping these measures? A few more weeks? A few more months? Or indefinitely?!

Considering TfL are only now pushing to write it into law, and it's unlikely they would do this for 'weeks' or even a few months, I'd say a safe assumption is that this is here to stay for at least the remainder of 21 and the start of 22. Spring 2022 is my prediction for the end of all this nonsense. All boosters combined with a winter resurgence dying off.

 

[Class 33]

Considering TfL are only now pushing to write it into law, and it's unlikely they would do this for 'weeks' or even a few months, I'd say a safe assumption is that this is here to stay for at least the remainder of 21 and the start of 22. Spring 2022 is my prediction for the end of all this nonsense. All boosters combined with a winter resurgence dying off.

Well to be honest, these independent retailers/vets/Specsavers or whatever that still have these measures aren't really places I use myself. So it doesn't make much difference to me. Though it is disappointing to see that a number of places are still keeping these ridiculous measures for however much longer past the date when they have been no longer legally required. For us to get back to normal, all these such retailers/vets/Specsavers and whatever other places need to drop this nonsense.

Yes I read briefly that Sadiq Khan and Tfl are trying to get it into law for face masks to be compulsory on public transport again! Just 2 and a half weeks since the legal restriction for them expired! Absolutely ridiculous! I hope Johnson tells them where to go. I hope Khan and Tfl are getting a huge backlash about their intended wishes!

 

[Green tractor]

And what exactly is 'free will'? We've seen with things such as Brexit, Gender and Trump over the last few years, anyone who expresses 'free will' in their thinking or comments which differ from the herd is invariably abused and insulted, Covid is no different in any way so many people show 'conformity' because they wish to live free of insult caused by the very 'free will' you mention

Personally I couldn't care less whether people wear masks or not, it has no 'mental' effect on me whatsoever, I'm simply surprised that such a large percentage are still wearing them when so many were supposedly screaming for their removal

Along with all those who were predicting a massive backlash against the various measures designed to combat covid if it carries on for much longer, and all the anti lockdown candidates who were going to win the London mayor election......

 

[Class 33]

Observations about Poundland. They frequently have PA announcements going off along the lines of "Even though it is no longer legally required to do so, for the safety of our colleagues and customers please continue to wear face masks and keep your distance. We're still in this together."!!! Annoying to still be hearing announcements about keeping our distance and "We're still in this together.". I think most of us are well and truly sick and tired of hearing these phrases now! Also the particular Poundland I go in most days before work. I usually go into get a couple of cans of fizzy drink, which are just by the entrance, and just a few seconds walk away from the checkouts. The staff have seen me going straight from the cans/small bottles section over to the checkouts. Yesterday I went in and they've blocked off the section to allow people to walk between the two. So now it means having to walk all down to the back of the shop and back down again via one of the other aisles to reach the checkouts! Absolutely ridiculous! Poundland, it's time to move on now from (un)-social distancing and face mask wearing!

 

[CentralTrainer]

I'm afraid to say that it didn't surprise me much.

For me, the key issue is that it we have been very cleverly and cruelly manipulated into a state where it has become socially required for healthy people to act as they are ill, and 'protect' others from an illness (that they probably don't have in the first place). It may no longer be *legally* required but the social obligation remains, and we are continually reminded of that by government, media, announcements and ever-present signage. Those who do not are 'selfish' and considered to be outside the norms of society.

Masks are the most obvious physical manifestation of this catastrophic societal shift - so while I respect the rights of people to wear them if they choose, I am dismayed that they continue to do so, because it shows that those people are content to go along with this fundamental and deeply troubling change in the way our society works.

All the nexus of this new society - tests, distancing, masks, vaccinating those at negligable risk from the disease, and now vaccine passports - are dependent on this shift. Equally much of what we previously valued in society - personal contact, large events, spontaneity, freedom - is dependent on reversing it. And those who continue to wear masks are, in effect, doubling down on the shift, making it less and less likely over time that it will be reversed.

Make no mistake how big a shift this is - two years ago if people were constantly checking if they were ill and taking 'precautions' against giving a stranger an illness they had no sypmtoms of and probably don't have, we would have called them neurotic, or paranoid, or OCD, or even said they had Munchausens' disease. And that society, for all its many faults, was a lot better than the one we have now.

Darnit - I only needed a reference to “face muzzles” to get a full house on the old bingo card.

 

[Failed Unit]

One things that is a concern is that this viewpoint that I am responsible for you getting Covid that seems to be coming out.

Lets look at some of the recent posting.
If you get vaccinated you are helping others? Really? Maybe the medical profession but I can still get Covid even if double jabbed and pass it one so me getting vaccinated has no benefit to anyone else.
If you don't wear a mask you are spreading covid. OK few issues with this one, if I don't have it I can't pass it on. If I get it does that mean I can therefore go out as normal with a mask on as according to some this will prevent me giving it to others? Is this really the message that people want to give out? Fortunately for me everyone I know that has had covid has had minimal symptoms, they stayed in to protect others but for how ill they felt they could have very easily gone on with normal life.

It appears that the current "you are doing this for others" seems to by the same logic mean that no-one should be taking measures themselves to protect themselves. As this is an observation thread, I am seeing people with masks on - their choice. But using hand sanitiser - not so many, considering it is everywhere. I didn't see a single person use it on TfL today.

 

[bramling]

One things that is a concern is that this viewpoint that I am responsible for you getting Covid that seems to be coming out.

Lets look at some of the recent posting.
If you get vaccinated you are helping others? Really? Maybe the medical profession but I can still get Covid even if double jabbed and pass it one so me getting vaccinated has no benefit to anyone else.
If you don't wear a mask you are spreading covid. OK few issues with this one, if I don't have it I can't pass it on. If I get it does that mean I can therefore go out as normal with a mask on as according to some this will prevent me giving it to others? Is this really the message that people want to give out? Fortunately for me everyone I know that has had covid has had minimal symptoms, they stayed in to protect others but for how ill they felt they could have very easily gone on with normal life.

It appears that the current "you are doing this for others" seems to by the same logic mean that no-one should be taking measures themselves to protect themselves. As this is an observation thread, I am seeing people with masks on - their choice. But using hand sanitiser - not so many, considering it is everywhere. I didn't see a single person use it on TfL today.

Your last point is interesting, as I've noticed the same. I suspect the answer to this is that it's no longer about protection from the virus, and everything about "respect", perhaps even feeling superior to others by assuming that other people are all filthy dirty germ killer monsters. I guess it's the consequence of mass hysteria, and the government has to shoulder some of the blame for this for whipping it all up.

 

[farleigh]

Your last point is interesting, as I've noticed the same. I suspect the answer to this is that it's no longer about protection from the virus, and everything about "respect", perhaps even feeling superior to others by assuming that other people are all filthy dirty germ killer monsters. I guess it's the consequence of mass hysteria, and the government has to shoulder some of the blame for this for whipping it all up.

I think you make good points @bramling.

From a scientific perspective, even the most avid mask advocate cannot produce any compelling evidence that they have any impact whatsoever.

However, the lure of virtue signalling has proven compelling for large numbers of people. The origin of that can definitely be traced to the government messaging which has been loathsome IMO

 

[bramling]

I think you make good points @bramling.

From a scientific perspective, even the most avid mask advocate cannot produce any compelling evidence that they have any impact whatsoever.

However, the lure of virtue signalling has proven compelling for large numbers of people. The origin of that can definitely be traced to the government messaging which has been loathsome IMO

I've found the government messaging rather infantile and puerile from start to finish. There has been little furnishing people with facts (hence why many people have misapprehensions about Covid), and much silly soundbiting. Even that has been muddled - what on earth does "you are *expected* to wear a mask" mean?

One wonders if this was how Eton College or the Bullingdon Club was run, and Boris has never moved on from that?

 

[MikeWM]

JCVI didn’t say no benefit to under 18s, they said insufficient evidence about harms.

I was replying to your comment about risk/benefit analysis. Of course there is a potential benefit, but in the under-18s it is extremely small. And we know there are some short-term risks from the vaccine, and we don't know what if any the long-term risks are.

As for the semantics of advertising, it’s also been experimented on extensively - it’s largely where “nudge” comes from. I still fail to see why trying to persuade someone to do something altruistic is unethical or immoral.

By using techniques that were designed and carefully honed over years to make people buy things, often against their better judgement? I'm really not sure that helps make your point.

Darnit - I only needed a reference to “face muzzles” to get a full house on the old bingo card.

You'll be waiting a while, I've never used the term.

In any event, it isn't much of a covid 'skeptic' bingo card if it doesn't at least also mention 'Sweden', 'Florida', 'Herd immunity' and 'Ivermectin'.

 

[Kez]

Reading through this thread, I note some particularly strong views on the minor inconvenience of wearing a face covering to try to slow the spread of a virus that has killed millions in a worldwide pandemic.

On a trip between Scotland and Southern England, I noted more facemask wearing the further south I went at service stations. I wonder whether the north of England has been hit worse by covid than the south and if there might be a correlation there.

 

[island]

Reading through this thread, I notice some particularly strong views assuming on behalf of other people that wearing a face covering the effects of which are unproven is “a minor inconvenience”.

 

[Huntergreed]

Reading through this thread, I note some particularly strong views on the minor inconvenience of wearing a face covering to try to slow the spread of a virus that has killed millions in a worldwide pandemic.

A “minor inconvenience” to yourself perhaps, but a major inconvenience to many. Personally, it’s had a very negative effect on my asthma (for which I’ve had to visit a doctor due to the mandate) but I still feel nervous claiming an exemption because apparently I should sacrifice my own health to be “respectful” and I risk facing abuse or fines if I decide to claim my exemption because of strong authoritarian views like yours.

I’m sure the thousands of people with hearing difficulties in this country would also passionately disagree with your claim of wearing a face covering being a “minor inconvenience”. For many, tasks such as going to the shops and visiting a hospitality venue have become huge sources of hardship, as the one thing they have been trained to do (lip reading) has been taken away, and thus they either feel ashamed or embarrassed by having to ask people to repeat themselves endlessly, or they simply feel excluded from society as they don’t want to use these services to have to feel this way to access essential services.

Finally, for those with a genuine medical exemption (such as myself), we’ve been made to feel like the scum of society and as if we should simply sit at home and keep out of everyone’s way (many people have said “if you’re exempt, then you shouldn’t even be out”) just because we have a reason why wearing a mask can cause some extra difficulties for us. It’s opinions like yours that fuel the disgraceful authoritarianism that has taken hold in this country and it’s opinions like yours which make me even more determined to rise up against this.

On a trip between Scotland and Southern England, I noted more facemask wearing the further south I went at service stations. I wonder whether the north of England has been hit worse by covid than the south and if there might be a correlation there.

I’m not sure there is entirely a geographic correlation. I was in Carlisle last week and didn’t see a single mask in the pubs I went to or tesco, yet whilst in London I saw many wearing masks (not including TfL where it’s mandatory). That said, it would be stupid to think that the percentage of people wearing a flimsy, loose-fitting piece of cloth over their face is the primary factor that determines how much SARS-CoV-2 transmits within a certain geographic area.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Aug 2021 ==

Reading through this thread, I notice some particularly strong views assuming on behalf of other people that wearing a face covering the effects of which are unproven is “a minor inconvenience”.

Authoritarians aee keen to dismiss this as it goes against their agenda and their ability to impose it. Sturgeon (who directly said this in a parliamentary briefing on Tuesday), Drakeford and Khan are particularly bad for this.

 

[Bantamzen]

Authoritarians aee keen to dismiss this as it goes against their agenda and their ability to impose it. Sturgeon (who directly said this in a parliamentary briefing on Tuesday), Drakeford and Khan are particularly bad for this.

Indeed, in the same way Socialists are often said to be to free and easy with other people's money, so Authoritarians are too free and easy with other people's liberties, especially when they have little impact on their own. For example those people calling for travel bans are often those that don't like or want to travel, and those calling for 10pm curfews are often those found only behind their net curtains.