Wearing Face Covering

[smurfchops]

Why are we obliged to wear a face covering when food shopping, but staff are not?

[New Judge]

One of the great mysteries of our time. You must wear a covering to protect them but they need not reciprocate.

[dannyk13]

I have sen the reason given as if the staff were to wear a face covering it would be for the duration of the working day which was considered too much.

[jno]

staff at all our local supermarkets are wearing them. But yes, I can see the difference between wearing one for 20 minutes (me, shopping) and all day (them, working).

[Gromit]

NJ
// You must wear a covering to protect them but they need not reciprocate. //

The objective of wearing masks in stores is to protect yourself and other shoppers.

[ichkeria]

It is daft, but I am very glad it's the case.

I wonder how many people have passed on the virus in a shop anyway. Apparently there are figures available for the number of infections at work (not very many).

[mushroom25]

//The objective of wearing masks in stores is to protect yourself and other shoppers. //

that objective would only be fulfilled if we were compelled to wear medical grade masks. but we're not.

at best (and even the medical jury is out on this) the coverings mandated might prevent you from passing it on they won't protect you.

[Prudie]

Exactly mushroom, I can't believe that with all the discussion some people still seem to think bog standard masks protect them. The general concensus is they may at most stop you passing it on.

[Gromit]

// the coverings mandated might prevent you from passing it on they won't protect you. //

Masks won’t prevent you passing covid on, and won’t protect you from getting covid. But a mask greatly reduces infections both ways. To say masks offer no protection for yourself, is wrong.

[jno]

The general concensus is they may at most stop you passing it on.

sounds like a good reason for everyone to wear them, then.

[ichkeria]

It is fascinating nonetheless to read about Sweden, which never introduced a strict lockdown. Certainly there was no public mask wearing.
And now the cases there are among the lowest in Europe. Possibly because there were so many cases to start with. Conversely Belgium, with one of the strictest lockdowns anywhere, has the highest per capita death rate in the world.
This surely suggests that when Patrick whatsisnsme made the much derided statement back in March that “we actually want people to get the virus” he had a point.
Only herd immunity ultimately will stop this, and IMO we should be a bit more relaxed about number of cases. Trying to pretend that we can isolate the thing out of existence is misguided.

[mushroom25]

// But a mask greatly reduces infections both ways.//
could you provide a link to your source for that please?

[ichkeria]

Proper masks probably do that.
Wrapping your granny’s old scarf or your sleeve over your mouth though?

[Prudie]

Jno not exactly sure why you felt the need to add this to my line
"The general concensus is they may at most stop you passing it on.
sounds like a good reason for everyone to wear them, then." because no-one on here so far is suggesting we don't wear one but it's to protect others not ourselves.

[New Judge]

//The general concensus is they may at most stop you passing it on.

sounds like a good reason for everyone to wear them, then.//

I disagree. As Ikky has pointed out, the notion that this virus can somehow be controlled or even eradicated (without a vaccine, which is most unlikely to be developed any time soon) is ridiculous. Viruses spread; this one will spread. All the measures and restrictions taken so far will do is to elongate the period over which that spread takes place. Hiding away, isolating, "distancing" and all the rest will not cut the mustard. People will contract it and walking around with a piece of damp, warm cloth in front of your nose and mouth with which you constantly meddle simply increases the risk to the wearer.

[Kathyan]

"Masks won’t prevent you passing covid on, and won’t protect you from getting covid. But a mask greatly reduces infections both ways. To say masks offer no protection for yourself, is wrong."
Never heard anything so ridiculous in my life!

[woofgang]

oh but kathyan, you have been on here since 2005....surely you must have done :)

[New Judge]

I suggest you download this document from the World Health Organisation dated 5th June:

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/advice-on-the-use-of-masks-in-the-community-during-home-care-and-in-healthcare-settings-in-the-context-of-the-novel-coronavirus-%282019-ncov%29-outbreak

It is a comprehensive document which explains the pros and cons of face coverings. If you can’t be bothered, here’s a few salient passages:

Advice to decision makers on the use of masks for the general public:

Many countries have recommended the use of fabric masks/face coverings for the general public. At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.

Potential harms/disadvantages

The likely disadvantages of the use of mask by healthy people in the general public include:

• potential increased risk of self-contamination due to the manipulation of a face mask and subsequently touching eyes with contaminated hands;

• potential self-contamination that can occur if nonmedical masks are not changed when wet or soiled. This can create favourable conditions for microorganism to amplify;

• potential headache and/or breathing difficulties, depending on type of mask used;

• waste management issues; improper mask disposal leading to increased litter in public places, risk of contamination to street cleaners and environment hazard;

• difficulty communicating for deaf persons who rely on lip reading;

This bit is particularly interesting:

WHO offers the following guidance on the correct use of masks, derived from best practices in health care settings:

• perform hand hygiene before putting on the mask;

• place the mask carefully, ensuring it covers the mouth and nose, adjust to the nose bridge, and tie it securely to minimize any gaps between the face and the mask;

• avoid touching the mask while wearing it;

• remove the mask using the appropriate technique: do not touch the front of the mask but untie it from behind.

• after removal or whenever a used mask is inadvertently touched, clean hands with an alcohol-based handrub, or soap and water if hands are visibly dirty;

• replace masks as soon as they become damp with a new clean, dry mask;

• do not re-use single-use masks;

• discard single-use masks after each use and dispose of them immediately upon removal.

Everybody doing all that? No, thought not. The miniscule - unproven - advantages of widespread "amateur" wearing of face coverings are immensely outweighed by the risks from improper use as detailed above. I personally will not expose myself to those risks as I certainly do not adhere to the required safety measures.

[pixie374]

The only part that confuses me, is why people believe that this is still about "health". Even the government have said it's to make people "feel safer". It's about confidence, to encourage people to use businesses and shops again. I can't honestly see how people are seeing it differently.

If masks were helpful, we would have used them from the start, not 4 months in.
Employees, who may be (in theory) exposed to it for 8 hours on a shift, don't need to wear one (because of comfort) but shoppers need to wear one for 2 minutes... because it gives others a feeling of safety.
The most vulnerable, such as those with breathing problems... are exempt.

I think we all know, and can clearly see, this is not about reducing the spread, now we know the NHS is coping. It's about getting people to start behaving "normally", supporting businesses etc.

It's what has been said all along... and is the only way that any of it makes any sense. Maybe the government has better advisors, than people are assuming.

[Prudie]

But pixie we must all be pretty daft if we feel safer but know they're nothing to with protecting health. Safer from what?

[pixie374]

I agree, prudie... although it seems the government, having scared the wits out of half the population, do believe that this will raise confidence generally. Whether they are right, I don't know yet.