UK face coverings discussion

[Bletchleyite]

But not all at the same time - the mass in shops mandate came witout any other major changes. Given that the incubation period of the disease is known, any benefit from masks should have been visible. But there was nothing at all.

People seem to distance less with masks, so it may be it was offset by that. Which might not be so bad - the "2m dance" and awkwardly passing people was rather a faff, as were long queues outside supermarkets and other shops.

 

[bramling]

I've personally witnessed absolutely zero "enforcement" beyond announcements on trains and polite requests when entering shops and shopping centres.

Depends on what one believes from social media. There’s one woman on my local Facebook who claims to sing a meme at anyone not in a mask, I forget what it is but it’s something like “Why haven’t you covered your face stop being such a disgrace” or something pathetic like that. Whether one believes that or not is another matter, as I’d have thought she’d have had her face restyled by now if she’d actually been doing that!

Meanwhile I’ve seen a guy prancing up and down a 700 making a point of eyeballing everyone’s face and having a go at anyone not in a mask. The irony is of course that by parading up and down a walk-through train he could well be acting as a superspreader himself.

Then there’s some of the nasty notices in shop windows, like “no mask no entry”, not mentioning exemptions.

Meanwhile my work has descended into a bit of a turf-war. We only have two offices routinely occupied in the building, both on separate floors. One of these offices is extremely pro-mask such that they seem to wear them even when they’re alone in there. The building has been covered with (unofficial home-made) notices about how it’s compulsory to wear masks in corridors and stairwells (which isn’t the case), and my lot are now getting dirty looks as none us are wearing them. I’m waiting for something to be said, as the response will be that I won’t take health advice from overweight smokers, and that perhaps if they were taking it quite as seriously as made out they wouldn’t still stand on the building steps with their masks round their chin and expect others to walk through their smoke! There’s nowt as hypocritical as a maskophile...

 

[DB]

If everyone wears them risk has to be REDUCED

I don't think even that can be claimed with any confidence, given that the way in which they are very frequently misused adds other risks.

 

[bramling]

People seem to distance less with masks, so it may be it was offset by that. Which might not be so bad - the "2m dance" and awkwardly passing people was rather a faff, as were long queues outside supermarkets and other shops.

I thought the queuing systems at most supermarkets were withdrawn before masks came in? Certainly I seem to remember that being the case with Tesco. The queues now seem to be back with a vengeance at some shops in my town (Waitrose never stopped) so we don’t seem much further forward.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I don't think even that can be claimed with any confidence, given that the way in which they are very frequently misused adds other risks.

Yes even on our planes over the weekend, wear them at all times unless you are actively eating and drinking. So if I am in my local pub in the UK (The Wheatsheaf in Woodplumpton btw) and I am drinking a pint or two I would not need to wear one.

Herd immunity strategy anyone? (we even missed that boat as it should have been done in the late spring and summer months).

 

[DB]

Then there’s some of the nasty notices in shop windows, like “no mask no entry”, not mentioning exemptions.

Loads of those around although things have improved a bit round here - the county council has evidently distributed a poster for shops to use, and a number of them are now using it instead of their home made ones - and it correctly mentions exemptions.

 

[bramling]

Loads of those around although things have improved a bit round here - the county council has evidently distributed a poster for shops to use, and a number of them are now using it instead of their home made ones - and it correctly mentions exemptions.

A standard poster would do a world of good.

I hate the way every shop now has its own brand of nasty notice on the door.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A standard poster would do a world of good.

I hate the way every shop now has its own brand of nasty notice on the door.

There's a stack of them here:

Posters - Coronavirus Resource centre

Maybe they should mandate the standard poster.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Oct 2020 ==

NI ones even better:

Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Coronavirus (COVID-19) guidance and support, easing of restrictions, symptom checker, testing and contact tracing for Northern Ireland

www.nidirect.gov.uk

 

[bramling]

There's a stack of them here:

Posters - Coronavirus Resource centre

Maybe they should mandate the standard poster.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Oct 2020 ==

NI ones even better:

Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Coronavirus (COVID-19) guidance and support, easing of restrictions, symptom checker, testing and contact tracing for Northern Ireland

www.nidirect.gov.uk

Should be mandatory. Would simmer things down quite a bit.

 

[Domh245]

There's a stack of them here:
Posters - Coronavirus Resource centre
Maybe they should mandate the standard poster.

I find the generic face covering people illustrations rather creepy. So long as any standard poster doesn't include them!

 

[43066]

People seem to distance less with masks, so it may be it was offset by that. Which might not be so bad - the "2m dance" and awkwardly passing people was rather a faff, as were long queues outside supermarkets and other shops.

I’m afraid this seems a little like moving the goalposts, and is also an admission that masks have already failed, at least in terms of the reasons they were initially introduced (ie they would allow mixing in settings where social distancing wasn’t possible, and were a way back to normality).

Months later we’re in a position where the majority have worn coverings in most settings where they’re required, yet there was no discernible reduction when they were introduced, and we’re now slipping back into more and more restrictions.

There's a stack of them here:

Posters - Coronavirus Resource centre

Maybe they should mandate the standard poster.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Oct 2020 ==

NI ones even better:

Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Coronavirus (COVID-19) guidance and support, easing of restrictions, symptom checker, testing and contact tracing for Northern Ireland

www.nidirect.gov.uk

Should be mandatory. Would simmer things down quite a bit.

Yep any posters displayed should be required to mention exemptions, and follow a standard format (and so should announcements made on trains!)

 

[Bikeman78]

I would rather have compulsory mask than compulsory lockdown. Lesser of two evils.

Didn't work in Wales!

 

[island]

Should be mandatory. Would simmer things down quite a bit.

Yep any posters displayed should be required to mention exemptions, and follow a standard format (and so should announcements made on trains!)

That is already the case for posters in shops and at stations. They are legally required to mention exemptions and reasonable excuses. Like most other Covid regulations, they are not enforced.

 

[Ianno87]

I find the generic face covering people illustrations rather creepy. So long as any standard poster doesn't include them!

Some do look a bit creepy, yes. Some are much better.

But images do reinforce covering nose and nouth.

 

[Bantamzen]

Can this whole debate not just be a bit simpler...

1. If you can wear a face covering and don't find it excessively uncomfortable, just live with it for now and don't take the piss. Yes the benefits might be far from clear, but it might, just might make a difference. Man-baby-esque "But I don't want to" isn't a valid reason either.

My one caveat for this would be that there now be discussion on the end -game. Given the rather flimsy evidence that they do work, and that the vast majority of people are wearing them when they don't even have the virus let alone at risk of spreading them, there has to be positive plans to roll mask mandation back as infection rates start to fall. So starting with walking around pubs / restaurants with them, wearing them in offices, then shops & public transport. This doesn't necessarily mean setting formal targets for each stage of roll-back, but there should be a clear policy that the rules will eventually be rolled back. Otherwise compliance will start to fall.

2. If you can't wear one, then don't, and go about your business confidently. Absolutely no shame in that.

3. It is absolutely nobody elses's business but yours who should and should not be wearing one. Reminders or requests from shop staff, train guards etc should be a polite "are you able, please?" and go no further if the answer if a polite "No".


Is it really that hard?

The other two points I can't argue with, if you can't wear them don't & its none of anyone else's business why.

The problem is not mask policy.

The problem is Social Media "shaming" culture.

Yup, something else I can't argue with.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem is the number of "won'ts". They cause problems for the "can'ts".

Those who object to wearing but do wear aren't really an issue; you are after all entitled to your opinion on the law (comparing it to a seaside animal is not after all unusual) provided you still follow it.

 

[Ianno87]

The problem is the number of "won'ts". They cause problems for the "can'ts".

Well put.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

The problem is the number of "won'ts". They cause problems for the "can'ts".

Those who object to wearing but do wear aren't really an issue; you are after all entitled to your opinion on the law (comparing it to a seaside animal is not after all unusual) provided you still follow it.

I raise you your won’ts with far far more ‘will but around my chin so I can make a pathetic protest and be as much of a spread risk as someone not wearing one at all’ types. This alone shows that compliance is mostly grudgingly. Proof of that will come if ever the government changes tack to make face coverings ‘advisory’ rather than compulsory...

 

[35B]

I raise you your won’ts with far far more ‘will but around my chin so I can make a pathetic protest and be as much of a spread risk as someone not wearing one at all’ types. This alone shows that compliance is mostly grudgingly. Proof of that will come if ever the government changes tack to make face coverings ‘advisory’ rather than compulsory...

Agreed. But that takes us back to the point of principle about laws being enforced. A law, especially if it’s unpopular, that isn’t enforced falls into disrepute as it becomes ignored. I welcome enforcement of the law as written while mask wearing is mandatory because it protects the rights of all, and prevents it becoming a free for all of amateur enforcement and who shouts loudest.

Other routes are available for those who disagree with the legislation, both legal and in the form of civil disobedience should they wish to put their principles to the test.

 

[Yew]

Other routes are available for those who disagree with the legislation, both legal and in the form of civil disobedience should they wish to put their principles to the test.

I think it's clear that the government will do whatever it takes to frustrate and delay the legal routes.

 

[DB]

Agreed. But that takes us back to the point of principle about laws being enforced. A law, especially if it’s unpopular, that isn’t enforced falls into disrepute as it becomes ignored. I welcome enforcement of the law as written while mask wearing is mandatory because it protects the rights of all, and prevents it becoming a free for all of amateur enforcement and who shouts loudest.

But realistically, the law is largely unenforceable as there simply aren't enough police to do so, and they have more important things to do. The government is basically relying on vigilantism, plus a few publicised cases of fines being issued to reinforce the message.

 

[VauxhallandI]

The irony being most of the people pointing at non mask wearing individuals will have themselves broken the rules on them in a regular basis and also not used them correctly

 

[35B]

But realistically, the law is largely unenforceable as there simply aren't enough police to do so, and they have more important things to do. The government is basically relying on vigilantism, plus a few publicised cases of fines being issued to reinforce the message.

Which latter part is the case with enforcement of many laws. A major influence on whether an individual who is otherwise predisposed to commit a crime is whether they believe they will be caught. Changing the game so that police are instructed to enforce Covid regulations will change that calculation for many, without necessarily imposing much more burden on police.

As for the comment about "vigilantism", I am not comfortable with the underlying idea behind the comment that all law enforcement should be delegated to the police, especially where it relates to matters like mask wearing which have a significant component of being tied to social norms. I'd suggest that social pressure around things like spitting in public, abuse of dedicated parking spaces, & drink driving as examples of where adherence to the law is boosted by the role of social pressure and taboo.

It remains the case that, in their opposition to this particular legislation, there is a depressing tendency on the part of some to try to deride reasonable enforcement of the law, preferring instead to make arguments about enforcement that are actually intended to undermine the effect of a law that they disagree with. Talking of which:

I think it's clear that the government will do whatever it takes to frustrate and delay the legal routes.

Possibly. But, assuming you're referring to the delay in hearing Simon Dolan's appeal against the rejection of his case for judicial review, if the government's behaviour in this litigation were so unreasonable, the judge had it in their power to refuse the government's request. Gamesmanship, for good or ill, is part of lawyers' armoury.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2020 ==

The irony being most of the people pointing at non mask wearing individuals will have themselves broken the rules on them in a regular basis and also not used them correctly

Most?

 

[duncanp]

And now we have Anders Tegnell from Sweden saying that the evidence for masks is "very weak"

Access Restricted

Sweden's top pandemic expert has claimed there is “very weak” evidence that mask wearing in society is effective.

Anders Tegnell, Sweden's state epidemiologist, said it was “dangerous” to believe masks could make “huge difference” in the fight against Covid-19.

Speaking to the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, Mr Tegnell said: "Unfortunately, the evidence between using masks in society is very weak... we don't really have a good idea of where they should be used, (and) to what extent.”

He added that despite a lot of European countries making masks mandatory they are now experiencing a surge in cases.

“I think it's dangerous to believe that masks will make a huge difference when you have an epidemic like this one,” he said.

Sweden is also considering reducing restrictions for its elderly and shielding population, he added, and the country's increase in cases has been "slowing down".

However, a recent study from Simon Fraser University found the use of masks can almost half the number of new Covid-19 cases.

Covering the face indoors resulted in up to 46 per cent fewer new Covid-19 cases every week in Canada, the researchers found.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Which latter part is the case with enforcement of many laws. A major influence on whether an individual who is otherwise predisposed to commit a crime is whether they believe they will be caught. Changing the game so that police are instructed to enforce Covid regulations will change that calculation for many, without necessarily imposing much more burden on police.

As for the comment about "vigilantism", I am not comfortable with the underlying idea behind the comment that all law enforcement should be delegated to the police, especially where it relates to matters like mask wearing which have a significant component of being tied to social norms. I'd suggest that social pressure around things like spitting in public, abuse of dedicated parking spaces, & drink driving as examples of where adherence to the law is boosted by the role of social pressure and taboo.

It remains the case that, in their opposition to this particular legislation, there is a depressing tendency on the part of some to try to deride reasonable enforcement of the law, preferring instead to make arguments about enforcement that are actually intended to undermine the effect of a law that they disagree with. Talking of which:
Possibly. But, assuming you're referring to the delay in hearing Simon Dolan's appeal against the rejection of his case for judicial review, if the government's behaviour in this litigation were so unreasonable, the judge had it in their power to refuse the government's request. Gamesmanship, for good or ill, is part of lawyers' armoury.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2020 ==


Most?

Yes most.

Can you tell me you’ve never taken yours off between shops etc?

Never touched any part of it bar the strings?

Etc etc.

 

[island]

I raise you your won’ts with far far more ‘will but around my chin so I can make a pathetic protest and be as much of a spread risk as someone not wearing one at all’ types. This alone shows that compliance is mostly grudgingly. Proof of that will come if ever the government changes tack to make face coverings ‘advisory’ rather than compulsory...

What I am personally pondering is what will happen once face coverings cease to be legally mandatory – I fully expect some businesses to keep up the requirement as a house rule. Some, such as Apple and Disney stores, had one before the law came in on 24 July.

 

[35B]

Yes most.

Can you tell me you’ve never taken yours off between shops etc?

Never touched any part of it bar the strings?

Etc etc.

I see, another attempt to yoke together the distinct questions of compliance with the law and the effectiveness of the measures mandated by that law.

Keeping the two firmly apart, my opinion is that most do obey the law and have done so since the use of face coverings was made mandatory. I also acknowledge that most mask wearing, though fully legally compliant, does not meet medical best practice for reasons like those you cite.

My argument in the post my reply to your's was automerged with was about the virtue of enforcing laws, not a comment on the quality of those laws. It would be inconsistent of me to criticise others for mixing the two and then do so myself.

 

[DustyBin]

And now we have Anders Tegnell from Sweden saying that the evidence for masks is "very weak"

Access Restricted

It's beyond doubt that the evidence to support the wearing of face coverings in a community setting is very weak indeed, and in fact there is evidence that they do more harm than good. I know I keep repeating myself but if the government and their advisors had any evidence, or even really believed that they are effective, they'd take the very simple step of asking people to wear a covering that meets some kind of minimum standard. When advocates of face coverings cite "an over-reliance on evidence-based medicine" (1) or suggest that "Instead of continuing to debate technical specifications and efficacy, sociocultural framings should be explored to encourage their use" (2) it's clear to me at least that there is a lack of supporting evidence.

(1) https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/set-c/set-c-facemasks.pdf

In England face masks and coverings for the general public in public places have not been mandated beyond public transport and hospitals. Wearing a face mask or covering in the UK has had very low uptake (~25%, late April 2020).The lack of clear recommendations for the general public and low uptake of wearing face masks and coverings may be attributed to: (i) over-reliance on an evidence-based medicine approach and assertion that evidence was weak due to few conclusive RCT (randomised controlled trial) results in community settings, discounting high quality non-RCT evidence. There have been no clinical trials of coughing into your elbow, social distancing and quarantine, yet these measures are seen as effective and have been widely adopted; (ii) inconsistent and changing advice from supranational organisations (WHO, ECDC) and other nations with variation in policy even within the UK; (iii) concern over the applicability of findings across multiple settings (health are versus general public, other pandemics and countries), yet many ‘lessons learned’ from previous pandemics, including public wearing of face masks and coverings, repeat themselves during COVID-19; and, (iv) mix of supply concerns of PPE shortages of surgical face masks with recommendations for face mask and covering wearing for general public.

(2) https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3021

Covering the mouth and nose is a public health measure designed to capture respiratory droplets from the wearer (who may not have symptoms) to reduce transmission of respiratory infections.1 Debates about whether face coverings should be used have framed them largely as a medical intervention with benefits and harms. Although the majority of countries and public health agencies now recommend or mandate face coverings against covid-19, viewing face coverings through a medical narrative still dominates.1234

Many public facing infographics on face coverings describe the initial steps as follows: “clean your hands before touching the mask, inspect the mask for damage or if dirty, adjust the mask to your face without leaving gaps on the side.”5 Given that social practices are deeply held and passionately defended, we hypothesise that uptake of face coverings is likely to be advanced by downplaying the medical narrative about “standards,” “donning and doffing,” “decontamination,” and “risk.” For successful uptake, face coverings need to be grounded in the social and cultural realities of affected communities.

 

[MikeWM]

When advocates of face coverings cite "an over-reliance on evidence-based medicine" (1) or suggest that "Instead of continuing to debate technical specifications and efficacy, sociocultural framings should be explored to encourage their use" (2) it's clear to me at least that there is a lack of supporting evidence.

Indeed - and these advocates being the Royal Society and the BMJ makes it all the more disappointing. We're moving away from science and towards superstition, a new Dark Ages of sorts, with dissent squashed by the authorities (in this case, the media, including 'social' media). I find that one of the most disturbing and dispiriting things about all this.

 

[35B]

It's beyond doubt that the evidence to support the wearing of face coverings in a community setting is very weak indeed, and in fact there is evidence that they do more harm than good. I know I keep repeating myself but if the government and their advisors had any evidence, or even really believed that they are effective, they'd take the very simple step of asking people to wear a covering that meets some kind of minimum standard. When advocates of face coverings cite "an over-reliance on evidence-based medicine" (1) or suggest that "Instead of continuing to debate technical specifications and efficacy, sociocultural framings should be explored to encourage their use" (2) it's clear to me at least that there is a lack of supporting evidence.

(1) https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/set-c/set-c-facemasks.pdf



(2) https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3021

It’s interesting that reference 2 in your post contains a link to a paper that provides a level of evidence that goes beyond what you allow for - https://www.authorea.com/doi/full/10.22541/au.158809415.52483068