UK face coverings discussion

[DB]

Which means the system is less effective, as then those who could wear coverings but don't like it then don't. And many such people are younger and so less likely to distance and so pose a greater risk.

The mind boggles as to why those with genuine exemptions don't want those exemptions keeping for them. After all, if everyone who is not exempt wears a covering, it's safer for those who can't, too.

I suspect those shouting about it in here are people who wouldn't get an exemption if it had to be given formally, though?

But there is still no even remotely-convincing evidence that masks make any difference anyway...

As regards exemptions, yes I can justifiably claim an exemption, but I don't actually believe that masks make any difference in any case. If I see someone else not wearing a mask I really couldn't care less what their reason is, or whether they even have a reason - it's absolutely none of my business.

And yes, I would have genuine grounds for an exemption if there was a formal system.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where will the enormous bureaucracy required to administer this system come from?

How many months do you want to set it up?

What "enormous bureaucracy"? It would be easily enough done for the vast majority of exempt people by GP surgeries having cards behind the counter that they hand over if you've got a given thing on your records. That would leave only the mental health related conditions to deal with, which could be via a quick telephone consultation. Again, the liars and cheats aren't brazen enough to do that.

But I wasn't even suggesting that. What I was doing was complimenting MK shopping centre on their policy, which is that if you wish to claim an exemption you simply go straight to the customer service desk on entry, state you are exempt (not why, just that you are) and get a lanyard, and pop it back once you're done. You can then shop in peace with nobody challenging you. And because your typical group of casual twentysomething lads (coincidentially the highest risk group to others, too, because they also mostly can't be bothered to socially distance either) who just can't be bothered to wear one wouldn't do that, then they get made to wear one or get lost.

I really fail to see any disadvantage whatsoever, and if I was exempt[1] I would be far happier with that than having to run the gauntlet of dirty looks and being asked by every member of staff I see why I'm not wearing one. And I'd be happy that very few people would be avoiding wearing one while not exempt.

And the "but it highlights me" thing is a non-issue too. Simply not wearing one highlights you.

The objections are really only coming from those who don't like masks. To whom I say, that's fair enough, but it is wrong to be encouraging the misuse of exemptions while it is the law.

[1] I'm borderline; with asthma I find I can wear one while not very physically active but it would be a problem while running.

 

[DB]

What "enormous bureaucracy"? It would be easily enough done for the vast majority of exempt people by GP surgeries having cards behind the counter that they hand over if you've got a given thing on your records. That would leave only the mental health related conditions to deal with, which could be via a quick telephone consultation. Again, the liars and cheats aren't brazen enough to do that.

You really are very judgemental, you know.

A 'quick telephone consultation' relating to someone having a mental health related condition. Seriously?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You really are very judgemental, you know.

Yes, I'm judgemental against mask "refuseniks". Very much so. And proud of it. If you aren't exempt, just put one on. Feel free to post here about your dislike and write to the papers etc, but in the meantime, wear one unless you would genuinely be exempt.

A 'quick telephone consultation' relating to someone having a mental health related condition. Seriously?

It doesn't really need to be much more than something like:

"How do you feel about wearing a mask, then?"
"I find it causes me to have a panic attack very quickly; I wouldn't leave the house if I had to wear one, and that would cause me to be severely depressed"
"OK, then, I'll make sure an exemption card is available at reception for you, you can pop down and collect it whenever is convenient, give me 5 minutes to update your records"

I'm not talking about a full-on diagnosis, just a simple discussion with your GP that would again weed out liars and cheats because almost nobody is that brazen.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Yes, I'm judgemental against mask "refuseniks". Very much so. And proud of it. If you aren't exempt, just put one on. Feel free to post here about your dislike and write to the papers etc, but in the meantime, wear one unless you would genuinely be exempt.



It doesn't really need to be much more than something like:

"How do you feel about wearing a mask, then?"
"I find it causes me to have a panic attack very quickly; I wouldn't leave the house if I had to wear one, and that would cause me to be severely depressed"
"OK, then, I'll make sure an exemption card is available at reception for you, you can pop down and collect it whenever is convenient, give me 5 minutes to update your records"

I'm not talking about a full-on diagnosis, just a simple discussion with your GP that would again weed out liars and cheats because almost nobody is that brazen.

And people would still doubt your pretty exemption badge, pointless waste of money

 

[DB]

And people would still doubt your pretty exemption badge, pointless waste of money

Yes, and doubtless it wouldn't be more than a day before fake ones were available on the internet.

 

[43066]

Which means the system is less effective, as then those who could wear coverings but don't like it then don't. And many such people are younger and so less likely to distance and so pose a greater risk.

The mind boggles as to why those with genuine exemptions don't want those exemptions keeping for them. After all, if everyone who is not exempt wears a covering, it's safer for those who can't, too.

“safety” really is too emotive a word to use when we are talking about negligible risk levels not a lot worse than flu for many (and that’s assuming that masks make any difference at all). Of course that’s exactly why it’s used in government messaging which is specifically designed to scare people into compliance.

I know some of you don't want masks. But if we are going to have them, and the Government has decided we are, then to me it really is quite important that those who really can't wear one are the only people who do not.

Important because you think masks work (I thought you’d conceded there’s no evidence), or because you think it’s important that people obey the law?

The same government has decided that anyone who believes that masks cause them “extreme distress” is exempt. No medical condition or disability is required. The government has also explicitly stated in its guidance that people should not be generally asked to show exemption certificates so if you want the letter and spirit of the law complied with you should be against the policy implemented by MK shopping centre.

 

[bramling]

And people would still doubt your pretty exemption badge, pointless waste of money

Exactly, this is getting like a revolving door. There’s a subset of people who don’t give a stuff whether someone is exempt or not. So wearing a badge doesn’t make any difference in that situation, there will still be the dirty looks, tut tuts, under the breath remarks, grudging tolerance from some train guards, outright refusal from Bridgnorth Cliff Railway, et cetera.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Important because you think masks work (I thought you’d conceded there’s no evidence), or because you think it’s important that people obey the law?

I'm still on the edge of the idea that masks may be reducing viral loads, or acting as a bit of a substitute for being unwilling to walk past people in supermarkets. So I'm still loosely pro, though that could change. However, it is important that people obey the law, yes; there are processes to challenge bad laws.

The same government has also decided ther anyone who believes that masks cause them “extreme distress” is exempt. No medical condition or disability is required. The government has also stated in its guidance that people should not be generally asked to show exemption certificates so if you want the letter and spirit of the law complied with you should be against the policy implemented by MK shopping centre.

What they are doing is not asking you to show an exemption certificate, rather to go and state you are exempt in order to make everyone's life easier.

 

[PhilipRdNGauge]

To be honest I think this is already happening.

I can't wear a mask. I'm not timid and 6'3" and big with it so often get left alone, but even I avoid mask situations as much as possible. I just don't want the hassle of potentially being challenged and questioned - its utterly demoralising, and you can never predict when it will happen.

For someone who is shy and a smaller person (bullies tend to pick on smaller people usually) the situation must be considerably worse. And virtually nothing seems to be done to help these people. The legislation is a case in point - how many times does the line about fines for non-wearing get trotted out? But it's only on forums such as this where the fines for non-compliance with signage about exemptions is even mentioned. Has any business anywhere actually been fined for this?

The only thing such people can do is give up on life. I suffer from anxiety & although early on I managed to wear a mask for the few minutes needed to get my weekly shopping at the local shop. It's now got to the stage were even putting one on for a couple of minutes to pick up my prescription, leaves me on the verge of a panic attack. Now that is probably sufficient for a medical exemption & rationally I could get away with it if challenged. But if I could be rational about it I wouldn't be suffering from anxiety. So, now I get all my food delivered & only get out for a solitary walk around the park, carefully avoiding everybody I meet just in case they accuse me of breathing at them. I haven't been on a bus or a train since March & don't expect to do so until government advice changes to "don't wear a mask", because even the thought of having to justify myself fills me with dread.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only thing such people can do is give up on life. I suffer from anxiety & although early on I managed to wear a mask for the few minutes needed to get my weekly shopping at the local shop. It's now got to the stage were even putting one on for a couple of minutes to pick up my prescription, leaves me on the verge of a panic attack. Now that is probably sufficient for a medical exemption & rationally I could get away with it if challenged. But if I could be rational about it I wouldn't be suffering from anxiety. So, now I get all my food delivered & only get out for a solitary walk around the park, carefully avoiding everybody I meet just in case they accuse me of breathing at them. I haven't been on a bus or a train since March & don't expect to do so until government advice changes to "don't wear a mask", because even the thought of having to justify myself fills me with dread.

The irony of this is that you would be helped by a formal exemption scheme, because you would only have to have one conversation with your GP (which you might dread, but it would happen once and once only) and then would get a card to show to anyone who questioned you.

 

[HSTEd]

What "enormous bureaucracy"? It would be easily enough done for the vast majority of exempt people by GP surgeries having cards behind the counter that they hand over if you've got a given thing on your records. That would leave only the mental health related conditions to deal with, which could be via a quick telephone consultation. Again, the liars and cheats aren't brazen enough to do that.

GP surgeries are overloaded at the best of time.
Putting yet another responsibility (who will generate these hundreds of thousands of cards)?

How will you avoid GPs just giving out exemptions to all and sundry to avoid an argument, as they are often accused of doing for sick notes.

 

[Darandio]

The irony of this is that you would be helped by a formal exemption scheme, because you would only have to have one conversation with your GP (which you might dread, but it would happen once and once only) and then would get a card to show to anyone who questioned you.

Please stop. I've got no reason for an exemption and wear one under duress, but this constant back and forth towards those with genuine reasons not to wear one is even making me uneasy. People are refusing to leave the house because they are scared stiff they will be challenged, a formal exemption scheme won't make an iota of difference because they same people who misunderstand and challenge now will still misunderstand regardless.

I'm fed up with this whole mess. If we have to continue this fruitless practice of wearing masks then if you are exempt, don't wear one. And if anyone sees someone else not wearing one then for the love of god leave them alone.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm fed up with this whole mess. If we have to continue this fruitless practice of wearing masks then if you are exempt, don't wear one. And if you see someone else not wearing one then for the love of god leave them alone.

I agree that those who feel they genuinely come under one of the exemptions should not wear one. However, it makes me quite angry that others are taking advantage of the exemptions to get away with not wearing one because they happen not to like them. Well, I don't enjoy wearing one either, it's uncomfortable and unpleasant. But it is, for the moment, considered necessary for the greater good, so put one on and be done with it unless you really, genuinely, absolutely can't. Note - "don't like it" is not "extreme distress", and that is seriously putting down those who genuinely do experience extreme distress, such as panic attacks.

I wonder if some of these people would prefer us not to investigate any crime just in case we might happen to occasionally falsely accuse someone.

Actually, I have heard of people on here (not many, but it's definitely come up) who object to showing their ticket more than once. I'll show mine as many times as I'm asked to, because I don't want anyone to get away without paying; it's right to pay your train fare (both legally and morally), so those who do should not object to measures that ensure that people do.

 

[43066]

What they are doing is not asking you to show an exemption certificate, rather to go and state you are exempt in order to make everyone's life easier.

That’s different to your description above:

state you are exempt (not why, just that you are) and get a lanyard, and pop it back once you're done.

So it sounds like they are asking people to wear written evidence of exemptions. That is expressly contrary to what the government guidance states.

However, it is important that people obey the law, yes; there are processes to challenge bad laws.

You can’t have it both ways. You say you want the law properly complied with - ok then - but that means accepting that exemptions can be entirely subjective, that there is no formal exemption system in place, and that exemption certificates are not to be generally asked for, as per government guidance.

You may well disagree and believe that a formal process should exist but the fact remains it doesn’t, presumably for a good reason. It is not for businesses like shopping centres to create their own exemption system in a misguided attempt to make peoples’ lives easier. Just like the police shouldn’t be be going around demanding that people provide proof of exemptions.

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

'm fed up with this whole mess. If we have to continue this fruitless practice of wearing masks then if you are exempt, don't wear one. And if anyone sees someone else not wearing one then for the love of god leave them alone.

Exactly this!

 

[Ianno87]

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.

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?

 

[DB]

The only thing such people can do is give up on life. I suffer from anxiety & although early on I managed to wear a mask for the few minutes needed to get my weekly shopping at the local shop. It's now got to the stage were even putting one on for a couple of minutes to pick up my prescription, leaves me on the verge of a panic attack. Now that is probably sufficient for a medical exemption & rationally I could get away with it if challenged. But if I could be rational about it I wouldn't be suffering from anxiety. So, now I get all my food delivered & only get out for a solitary walk around the park, carefully avoiding everybody I meet just in case they accuse me of breathing at them. I haven't been on a bus or a train since March & don't expect to do so until government advice changes to "don't wear a mask", because even the thought of having to justify myself fills me with dread.

This demonstrates the point exactly. But the government simply doesn't care.

 

[Yew]

there are processes to challenge bad laws.

I think that with Simon Dolans legal challenge, has shown that the government will not hesitate to try and delay any scrutiny of their actions as much as possible; last time it was "one of the government lawyers has gone on holiday"

 

[DB]

Is it really that hard?

For some people, yes it is that hard - simple as that. As is clearly demonstrated by PhilipRdNGauge above. It is disgusting that people are being put in this position by a policy which has no demonstrable benefit.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

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

 

[Ianno87]

For some people, yes it is that hard - simple as that. As is clearly demonstrated by PhilipRdNGauge above. It is disgusting that people are being put in this position by a policy which has no demonstrable benefit.

The problem is not mask policy.

The problem is Social Media "shaming" culture.

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

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

Seconded. Masks* are many many times more preferable to going loopy at home day in, day out.

*I do look forward to the day when they are no longer required, however.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

It's not so much what I want, as what the law specifies. It happens that I agree with the law in this case, at least for the time being, but that's irrelevant.

Another example - we were better without speed cameras, but too many people are incapable of reading the number in a red circle and making sure the needle in front of them doesn't go past it. So people who are occasionally distracted or miss a sign by accident are hit with fines, when before a genuine apology to the Police Officer who stopped you would probably do.

More unfairness caused by people who think they're above the law.

How do you separate the ‘genuine’ over-speed drivers from those that claim they were distracted? And wouldn’t claiming to have been distracted or missing a road sign come under ‘driving without due care and attention’ ?
I would expect an authoritarian to insist the law is the law !

 

[island]

I think that with Simon Dolans legal challenge, has shown that the government will not hesitate to try and delay any scrutiny of their actions as much as possible; last time it was "one of the government lawyers has gone on holiday"

It’s been relisted for 30 October

 

[43066]

The problem is not mask policy.

The problem is the policy being misinterpreted and enforced more strictly than necessary.

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

But you’re rather begging the question of whether masks work in the first place. If they don’t theb there’s no choice between masks and lockdowns, they’re two unrelated measures.

And, sure enough, we may soon have both! Months after they were introduced it’s pretty clear they’ve had minimal (if any) affect on infection rates, and we are heading towards another potential lockdown...

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would expect an authoritarian to insist the law is the law !

I'm not really an authoritarian. I'd rather have fewer laws but with people thinking of others properly before taking actions. As people don't do that, laws and enforcement are necessary.

 

[DB]

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

We keep getting presented with these false 'either/or' options (the government does it all the time).

The appropriate answer is 'neither' unless there si clear evidence that one or both is of any benefit and serves any workable policy.

 

[Ianno87]

The problem is the policy being misinterpreted and enforced more strictly than necessary.

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

And, sure enough, we may soon have both! Months after they were introduced it’s pretty clear they’ve had minimal (if any) affect on infection rates, and we are heading towards another potential lockdown...

Well, it's hard to tell as lots of other things have changed at the same time - nom-essential retail back open, education returning, leisure public transport use allowed (properly) again...

 

[Yew]

We keep getting presented with these false 'either/or' options (the government does it all the time).

The appropriate answer is 'neither' unless there si clear evidence that one or both is of any benefit and serves any workable policy.

Unfortunately, false dichotomies are standard in politics discourse.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

But you’re rather begging the question of whether masks work in the first place.

Well you would have to define work. If everyone wears them risk has to be REDUCED but no they are way off 100% effective - from all the study I have done on them.

 

[DB]

Well, it's hard to tell as lots of other things have changed at the same time - nom-essential retail back open, education returning, leisure public transport use allowed (properly) again...

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.