Will you continue using a face mask after 19 July?

[bimble]

I was wondering the same thing. I more or less exclusively shop in one of two Waitrose shops and there has been an almost 100% adherence to the rule. I think I've only seen two people in all this time who weren't wearing masks. Even before it became mandatory there were many people in Waitrose wearing masks.

Yeah, i go there about 1 in 3 times i go food-shopping, on rotation just so i don't become a Waitrose Person. it's been reliably the most consistently masked-up place i've visited the whole time. Its an older demographic, that might be a part of it.

 

[killer b]

Yes, ... from the perspective of spreading the disease and with reference to whether or not people will continue to wear masks after they're told they don't have to.

For the majority of people who are not shielding or do not fear contracting the virus (vaccinated, already had it, magic, whatever) the only preceived reason to continue to wear them is to prevent them spreading it. Now, with that mindset, if there are already 200 people in Sainsbury's without masks, can you see why others might decide not to bother?

I agree plenty of people might decide not to bother. That's not the same as there being no point though?

 

[Spymaster]

Also Urban75 is not a representative sample. It's like taking a GB News poll but with an opposite result.

I disagree with your take on the wearing of masks but this bit is true. U75 have many good intentioned folk for a variety of reasons but out there in the real world, folk will ditch the masks as soon as they won't get in trouble for doing so.

 

[Spymaster]

I agree plenty of people might decide not to bother. That's not the same as there being no point though?

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the vast majority decide not to bother, from the perspective of group transmission, yes. There is little point in one person deciding not to piss in the pool when the other 200 are all slashing away. That will certainly be the general perception.

 

[TopCat]

Back to shopping at Lidl at ten o’clock at night and only once a month then. Plus will get a stout walking cane.

 

[miss direct]

I have experience of being treated differently due to wearing a mask. I came back to the UK last year at the start of June. Masks had been mandatory in Turkey since March or April.

I had to fly back via Belarus and spend the best part of a day dodging crowds in Minsk Airport. Was anxious about flying and flew with a medical mask, fabric mask and a shield (maybe a bit ott but everything was more unknown then.) There were others on my flight in full haz mat suits. One woman had a screaming panic attack on the first flight before take off and banged on the door to be let off, meaning the plane stopped on the runway and went back to the gate to eject her. Irrelevant perhaps but added to the general anxiety.

Anyway I was pretty horrified to land in the UK and be treated with disdain and suspicion due to my mask wearing. It started with the immigration officer... and was so uncomfortable in shops that I avoided going wherever possible.

 

[bimble]

I think there'll be a really very small number of people who just carry on masking regardless of what everyone else is doing in whatever place they are in.

 

[emanymton]

Looks like some of these work out to around £5/mask.

Seriously?

One of them is £150!!!!

 

[killer b]

If the vast majority decide not to bother, from the perspective of group transmission, yes. There is little point in one person deciding not to piss in the pool when the other 200 are all slashing away. That will certainly be the general perception.

Ok got it. So there will be a point to being the only person in Sainsbury's wearing one, just not from one perspective.

 

[David Clapson]

One of the things I like about masks is that they signal to other people that you're concerned about getting close to them. If you stand back to let someone through a door or a gap in the crowd, they get the message without anything being said. It saves time, reduces confusion and reduces the chance of transmission.

 

[Aladdin]

As of yesterday the WHO advice was to continue to wear masks and follow all measures.

 

[Spymaster]

Ok got it. So there will be a point to being the only person in Sainsbury's wearing one, just not from one perspective.

Christ.

You're not usually this stupid so I'll let you think it over for a while. If you're still struggling with it later I might draw you a picture.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

On ignore

Oh do me next!

Go suck a shipping container full of mangy, covid infested cocks you thick, arrogant bucket of sheep's piss.

 

[Spymaster]

One of them is £150!!!!

I know

Sadly, I think many of the people who buy these will be those least able to afford them.

The directors of the firm should be shot.

 

[cupid_stunt]

I think there'll be a really very small number of people who just carry on masking regardless of what everyone else is doing in whatever place they are in.

I think there'll be regional variations, there was already a high proportion of people wearing them around here before it was mandated, around 50%, then it went to almost 100% & remains at that level, so I expect over half will continue to wear them in shops.

 

[Mr Retro]

Plus they have to show a negative lateral flow test result too.

Yes I agree but as a pointer I think it shows people will stop wearing them. We'll see

 

[killer b]

Christ.

You're not usually this stupid so I'll let you think it over for a while. If you're still struggling with it later I might draw you a picture.

I'm not struggling - I know there's going to be a massive drop off in mask wearing after the 19th for various reasons, including people thinking there's no point if no-one else is. But people thinking there's no point doesn't mean there's no point. One asymptomatic infected person wearing a mask reduces their chance of infecting other people in the shop even if everyone else is maskless, and even if there are other people in the shop, maskless, who are also infected. Of course it does. Would you like me to draw you a picture?

 

[Mr Retro]

I'm interested in what you think a proportional response might be to a virus which - while low risk to most people - still overwhelmed the health services at the height of infections, even with the apparently disproportional restrictions in place.

We had a plan in place for dealing with pandemics based on years and years of experience but we threw it all away and copied China. I would have followed the plan already in place

 

[cupid_stunt]

We had a plan in place for dealing with pandemics based on years and years of experience but we threw it all away and copied China. I would have followed the plan already in place

We didn't have a plan to deal with a coronavirus pandemic.

 

[bimble]

I think there'll be regional variations, there was already a high proportion of people wearing them around here before it was mandated, around 50%, then it went to almost 100% & remains at that level, so I expect over half will continue to wear them in shops.

Yeah, i just meant in any given context, the person who will wear their mask in a room full of naked faces will be - tautology! - a very rare sort of person.

 

[Mr Retro]

There is ample and unambiguous evidence that using masks reduce transmission of respiratory diseases, including covid.

No there is not. In the studies posted earlier by Cupid Stunt one of them trots out the hair dresser example yet again.

You can keep saying that the evidence is clear but it is not. Before healthy people with almost no danger of getting seriously ill or dying were disproportionately scared:

• World Health Organisation with 70+ years of experience at the start of the pandemic: ‘There is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can protect them from infection with respiratory viruses, including Covid-19.’
• Mike Ryan a director at WHO around the same time: ‘There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly.’
• Chris Whitty, again around the same time: ‘In terms of wearing a mask, our advice is clear: that wearing a mask if you don’t have an infection reduces the risk almost not at all . So we do not advise that.’

The Denmark-19 study that was done before UK were told to start wearing masks last June. A large randomised controlled trial to see if masks protected people wearing them. The finding was difference in outcomes between those wearing masks and those not was ‘not statistically significant’. If there is another randomised controlled trial I can’t find it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

We had a plan in place for dealing with pandemics based on years and years of experience but we threw it all away and copied China. I would have followed the plan already in place

I heard an interesting podcast about that a little while ago. Essentially, if you were judging on prepandemic planning, you would have guessed, prepandemic, that the UK and the US were among the best-prepared nations on Earth. They ended up two of the worst-hit, most chaotically disorganised nations on Earth. What they lacked, which other places like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, etc, had, was the flexibility to respond swiftly in a fashion that wasn't in the pre-prepared rulebook. The extensive preplanning actually hurt them.

 

[Spymaster]

But people thinking there's no point doesn't mean there's no point.

Do you agree that the more people who think there's no point, the fewer will wear masks?

 

[killer b]

Do you agree that the more people who think there's no point, the fewer will wear masks?

sure

 

[Mr Retro]

I heard an interesting podcast about that a little while ago. Essentially, if you were judging on prepandemic planning, you would have guessed, prepandemic, that the UK and the US were among the best-prepared nations on Earth. They ended up two of the worst-hit, most chaotically disorganised nations on Earth. What they lacked, which other places like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, etc, had, was the flexibility to respond swiftly in a fashion that wasn't in the pre-prepared rulebook. The extensive preplanning actually hurt them.

Interesting but I think there is much more to the UK and US being the worst hit. Mainly 2 very unhealthy populations

 

[Cloo]

I might drop it for literally popping into corner shop for something, but otherwise will keep them. In fact have bought some proper medical grade ones for a few upcoming times I'll need to go on tube or otherwise be in one spot in enclosed spaces while numbers are zooming up. Fabric mask will suffice for supermarket. I'm double vaxxed (well, will be covered by it by 19th) but seems wise until numbers are down again.

 

[bimble]

We didn't have a plan to deal with a coronavirus pandemic.

Yeah it was for a flu pandemic.

UK pandemic preparedness

www.gov.uk

"Both influenza and the virus that leads to COVID-19 cause respiratory disease and spread in a similar way.. These similarities meant that certain elements of our pandemic preparedness plans were able to be quickly utilised and adapted in our response to COVID-19.
However, there are some important differences between the virus that causes COVID-19 and the virus that causes influenza. As such, not all aspects of the UK’s plans for mitigating an influenza pandemic have been applied to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak."
etc.

Which is not exactly the same as we inexplicably binned it and copied china but close.

 

[two sheds]

No there is not. In the studies posted earlier by Cupid Stunt one of them trots out the hair dresser example yet again.

You can keep saying that the evidence is clear but it is not. Before healthy people with almost no danger of getting seriously ill or dying were disproportionately scared:

• World Health Organisation with 70+ years of experience at the start of the pandemic: ‘There is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can protect them from infection with respiratory viruses, including Covid-19.’
• Mike Ryan a director at WHO around the same time: ‘There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly.’
• Chris Whitty, again around the same time: ‘In terms of wearing a mask, our advice is clear: that wearing a mask if you don’t have an infection reduces the risk almost not at all . So we do not advise that.’

I'd understood that this was early advice that was then revised.

Just to confirm, are you suggesting that doctors and nurses (for example) in covid wards should not bother wearing N95 or N99 masks?

 

[Mr Retro]

I'd understood that this was early advice that was then revised.

Just to confirm, are you suggesting that doctors and nurses (for example) in covid wards should not bother wearing N95 or N99 masks?

Not at all. I am talking about loose, dirty, much pawed, dropped, cloth face covers

 

[cupid_stunt]

No there is not. In the studies posted earlier by Cupid Stunt one of them trots out the hair dresser example yet again.

You can keep saying that the evidence is clear but it is not. Before healthy people with almost no danger of getting seriously ill or dying were disproportionately scared:

• World Health Organisation with 70+ years of experience at the start of the pandemic: ‘There is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can protect them from infection with respiratory viruses, including Covid-19.’
• Mike Ryan a director at WHO around the same time: ‘There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly.’
• Chris Whitty, again around the same time: ‘In terms of wearing a mask, our advice is clear: that wearing a mask if you don’t have an infection reduces the risk almost not at all . So we do not advise that.’

The Denmark-19 study that was done before UK were told to start wearing masks last June. A large randomised controlled trial to see if masks protected people wearing them. The finding was difference in outcomes between those wearing masks and those not was ‘not statistically significant’. If there is another randomised controlled trial I can’t find it.

Fuck me, you have a cheek, you moaned yesterday that the study covering the 'hair dresser example' was from last year, now you are quoting very early advice from the WHO & Whitty, both of which changed their advice, as more became known about the virus.

Early on, the thought was transmission occurred mainly from [large] droplets, hence concerns about transmission from surfaces, where the droplets would land. Now it is known the main route of transmission is via aerosols that are so small that buoyant forces overcome gravity, allowing them to stay suspended in the air for long periods. Once airborne transmission became the main focus, face masks became an important defence against it.