Making the wearing of a mask manditory

[weepingwillow22]

Has anyone else noticed the worldometer projections for UK deaths have changed significantly since the relaxation of restrictions last week?
covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom

The deaths are now predicted to be back up to 800 a day by november with a second peak in cases surpassing the first one.

The graphs do however show that this can be avoided if mask wearing is made compulsory.

AIBU to think that the wearing of a mask or visor (excepting those eho cannot wear them for medical conditions) should be made manditory in all indoor public places in order to avoid this second peak.

If cases rise again to the extent projected here another national lockdown will be required resulting in more job losses, school closures and unnecessary deaths.

Surely the wearing of a mask is a small price to pay to avoid a second peak particularly as the scientific evidence now points to it being highly effective in preventing asymptomatic spread.
www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

If people don’t know how to use masks correctly then they need to be educated. It’s really not that difficult.

@daisymay133

No masks defo shouldn’t be enforced

352 got the virus on Monday - out of 66 million in UK - get a grip honestly

This.

Shops are open. We’ve had VE Day celebrations, crowded beach, races, riots, people back at work, children have been in school since the look down, family bubbles ect.. and they were not wearing masks.

Still no second peak. Week on week figures are dropping. The figures do not lie.

It should be mandatory, not to protect the wearer but to protect everyone else.

It was undermined as they were declared ineffective as protection to the wearer as pp point out issue of touching mask and reusing if removed, so if you had touched something with the virus on you could transfer to the mask which you then wear.

However that risk applies mask or not, people touch their faces a lot.

The benefit is when an asymptomatic person wears a mask they are not breathing it all over other people, so if most people wore it is would reduce transfer.

I agree, we should all be wearing masks...Scotland has the right attitude, I think.
I ma constantly amazed by how many people don't wear masks when shopping, especially now more and more people are getting out and about. We help protect ourselves while protecting others.....

@LilQueenie

no point in being mandatory when people are printing off exemption cards. an exemption should be through the doctors only.

Yeah, can't see any flaws in that plan. GPs are, of course, always really straightforward to access plus really willing and able to do this type of thing promptly. Especially in pandemics.

I'm in Scotland and they become compulsory in shops from 10 July.

I hate the thought of wearing one, but I will. But I won't be going into anywhere other than food shops as I worry I won't be able to breathe in one for any length of time (am asthmatic). I also have rosacea and my skin will end up red, hot and painful.

I hope though it doesn't become compulsory everywhere indoors as would hate to wear on for my whole working day

OK so, if mask wearing is made mandatory, when should it end?
Or are we expected to wear them forever?

If you use them properly, you're going to need multiple cloth ones (useless for people with glasses who would actually like to see) or alot of disposable surgical ones.
How are we expecting people on the breadline to pay for these?

Call me selfish. I don't want face covers to be compulsory when I'm on outings in the countryside on my bicycle/runs/walks with DC, kayaking in the river. Or even nipping out to put the bins at the end of my driveway. I'd rather not be compelled to wear one while cycling or walking down empty streets to the shops, or cycling thru the city to run errands. The WHO guidance says don't wear facemasks while doing aerobic exercise.

This with bells on! I wear one when I go into the hospital for appointments (which have just been offered again). But I was cycling to the hospital, going through a country park, out in the open, no one else but me and the grazing cattle (and one bull, the signs warned! That always makes me a tad nervous!), when I came upon a guy sitting in the field, reading a book, wearing his face mask. They're pretty awful to wear for any length of time. I couldn't wait to get out of the hospital and back on my bike. I could not at all fathom why that guy in the middle of a great field full of trees and grazing cattle in the distance (and me cycling past at speed) would wear a mask.

I wear one everywhere. Why wouldn't you when there was even a small chance it will help save a lot of lives? I hope they become compulsory soon.

Wearing a mask is absolute bollocks. I dealt with a customer wearing one this afternoon, she must have moved it about 100 times during the hour I sat with her. Moving her hands around her face constantly.

It only helps your mental health as a placebo. Not your physical health.

The effective ways to lessen your chances of catching Covid 19 are washing your hands, and maintaining a distance.

@araiwa

• No exemptions

Allowing someone to spread a fatal disease is not a reasonable adjustment*

If I put on a mask, within a couple of minutes I can be on my knees in severe pain, I've tried it. So based on your view I wouldn't be able to go out, essentially confined to my home. That's extremely unfair isn't it?

I'm sure I could put a variation of a well know phrase to that, but that wouldn't go down too well, but it would be true.

@Clearyweary

I think they should be mandatory for everybody, regardless of medical conditions.

Oh yes because wearing a mask whilst having an epileptic seizure is going to end just fine, no one has ever died whilst inhaling their own vomit.

We're told that masks may help those who are asymptomatic or presymptomatic from unknowingly spreading the virus.

What scientific studies have been done to understand this more? If someone is asymptomatic/presymptomatic , do they shed enough to infect someone on a similar scale to how they are experiencing it, or is it variable? From which distances, and how? Is an asymptomatic/presymptomatic person more likely to infect directly by their breath, or tindirectly hrough things they have touched?

I haven't seen anything other then anecdoctal evidence (which is important, but still anecdoctal rather than scientific enquiry) to find out more about this. I think it would be a really useful thing to be looking at right now, too!

@profpoopsnagle

We're told that masks may help those who are asymptomatic or presymptomatic from unknowingly spreading the virus.

What scientific studies have been done to understand this more? If someone is asymptomatic/presymptomatic , do they shed enough to infect someone on a similar scale to how they are experiencing it, or is it variable? From which distances, and how? Is an asymptomatic/presymptomatic person more likely to infect directly by their breath, or tindirectly hrough things they have touched?

I haven't seen anything other then anecdoctal evidence (which is important, but still anecdoctal rather than scientific enquiry) to find out more about this. I think it would be a really useful thing to be looking at right now, too!

From the report I linked to earlier...

There are several strands of evidence supporting the efficacy of masks.

One category of evidence comes from laboratory studies of respiratory droplets and the ability of various masks to block them. An experiment using high-speed video found that hundreds of droplets ranging from 20 to 500 micrometers were generated when saying a simple phrase, but that nearly all these droplets were blocked when the mouth was covered by a damp washcloth. Another study of people who had influenza or the common cold found that wearing a surgical mask significantly reduced the amount of these respiratory viruses emitted in droplets and aerosols.

But the strongest evidence in favor of masks come from studies of real-world scenarios. “The most important thing are the epidemiologic data,” said Rutherford. Because it would be unethical to assign people to not wear a mask during a pandemic, the epidemiological evidence has come from so-called “experiments of nature.”

A recent study published in Health Affairs, for example, compared the COVID-19 growth rate before and after mask mandates in 15 states and the District of Columbia. It found that mask mandates led to a slowdown in daily COVID-19 growth rate, which became more apparent over time. The first five days after a mandate, the daily growth rate slowed by 0.9 percentage-points compared to the five days prior to the mandate; at three weeks, the daily growth rate had slowed by 2 percentage-points.

Another study looked at coronavirus deaths across 198 countries and found that those with cultural norms or government policies favoring mask-wearing had lower death rates.

Two compelling case reports also suggest that masks can prevent transmission in high-risk scenarios, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford. In one case, a man flew from China to Toronto and subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. He had a dry cough and wore a mask on the flight, and all 25 people closest to him on the flight tested negative for COVID-19. In another case, in late May, two hair stylists in Missouri had close contact with 140 clients while sick with COVID-19. Everyone wore a mask and none of the clients tested positive.

Here is the key for the graph. You can see that both the projected lines assume that mandates are reimposed for 6 weeks when daily deaths reach 8 per million. The only different between the lines is the wearing of masks.

No OP, you misread the key and did not look up the FAQS that listed the mandates. The key actually states:

RED LINE: Mandates easing: Continued easing of social distancing mandates, and mandates are not re-imposed

GREEN LINE: 95% mask usage in public in every location, reaching levels seen in Singapore. Mandates are re-imposed for 6 weeks if daily deaths reach 8 per million (0.8 per 100k)

The difference in the two lines is mandates + masks, not just masks. In addition, you go to the modelling FAQS to see what assumptions are in each scenario and it says:
What assumptions are included in each scenario?

The assumptions for each scenario include:

Scenario

RED LINE or Mandates easing
Assumes mask use continues at currently observed rates
Assumes that the gradual easing of social distancing mandates continues
Assumes that mandates are never re-imposed

GREEN LINE: Universal masks
Assumes mask use rises to 95% within 7 days
Assumes that the gradual easing of social distancing mandates continues
Assumes that mandates will be re-imposed for six weeks if daily deaths reach 8 per million: Educational facilities closed

Non-essential businesses closed

People ordered to stay at home

Large gatherings banned

• Mandatory mask use put in place

www.healthdata.org/covid/faqs

I had a doctor's appointment the other day. It says very clearly on the website and on the doors to wear a mask. I was also told to do that when I made the appointment.

Out of nine patients, only two of us wore masks. The doctors and nurses had them, but not the receptionists.

@LouiseTrees

Scotland is making the wearing of masks indoor compulsory from this Friday. I think the rest of the UK should folloW their example.

Agree with this. It seems boneheaded for Johnson not to do this. I do not understand it.

[quote PlanDeRaccordement]Here is the key for the graph. You can see that both the projected lines assume that mandates are reimposed for 6 weeks when daily deaths reach 8 per million. The only different between the lines is the wearing of masks.

No OP, you misread the key and did not look up the FAQS that listed the mandates. The key actually states:

RED LINE: Mandates easing: Continued easing of social distancing mandates, and mandates are not re-imposed

GREEN LINE: 95% mask usage in public in every location, reaching levels seen in Singapore. Mandates are re-imposed for 6 weeks if daily deaths reach 8 per million (0.8 per 100k)

The difference in the two lines is mandates + masks, not just masks. In addition, you go to the modelling FAQS to see what assumptions are in each scenario and it says:
What assumptions are included in each scenario?

The assumptions for each scenario include:

Scenario

RED LINE or Mandates easing
Assumes mask use continues at currently observed rates
Assumes that the gradual easing of social distancing mandates continues
Assumes that mandates are never re-imposed

GREEN LINE: Universal masks
Assumes mask use rises to 95% within 7 days
Assumes that the gradual easing of social distancing mandates continues
Assumes that mandates will be re-imposed for six weeks if daily deaths reach 8 per million: Educational facilities closed

Non-essential businesses closed

People ordered to stay at home

Large gatherings banned

• Mandatory mask use put in place

www.healthdata.org/covid/faqs[/quote]
The no masks vs mask comparison is by comparing the current projection to the universal mask projection. I have removed the third (mandates easing) scenario from the attached diagram so it is clearer.

Both of these scenarios assume the following:
Assumes that the gradual easing of social distancing mandates continues
Assumes that mandates will be re-imposed for six weeks if daily deaths reach 8 per million: Educational facilities closed
Non-essential businesses closed
People ordered to stay at home
Large gatherings banned

Both actually do assume mandatory mask use however the cuurent projection assumes mask use continues at currently observed rates whilst the universal mask projection assumes mask use rises to 95% within 7 days.

Thank you @weepingwillow22 that makes interesting reading.

But I probably didn't explain my thinking very well, I have been trying in vain) to find studies which look at the asymptomatic nature of Covid rather than the masks per se. I'd like to know more on how dangerous the asymptomatic nature is, as in can someone with asymptomatic symptoms pass on the virus that would cause a much more worse effect in another individual. So, for example with the two cases at the bottom where no transmission happened, was that due to the masks, or to a weakened virus, or something else?

The mandades easing scenario follows the same line as the current projection. This is becuase the measures it includes only come into force when daily deaths reach 8 per million. They do not reach this number in the timeframe in the diagram.

@profpoopsnagle

Thank you *@weepingwillow22* that makes interesting reading.

But I probably didn't explain my thinking very well, I have been trying in vain) to find studies which look at the asymptomatic nature of Covid rather than the masks per se. I'd like to know more on how dangerous the asymptomatic nature is, as in can someone with asymptomatic symptoms pass on the virus that would cause a much more worse effect in another individual. So, for example with the two cases at the bottom where no transmission happened, was that due to the masks, or to a weakened virus, or something else?

You may find this research summary of interest coronavirusexplained.ukri.org/en/article/und0006/ There still seem to be a lot of unknowns regarding asymptomatic carrier transmission. Presymptomatic carriers are however a definite risk factor which can be mitigated by the wearing of masks.

'Studies of patients with COVID-19 indicate that viable virus can be detected in swabs up to six days before to the onset of symptoms.[1][2][3] Estimates of the percentage of all infections transmitted by an individual prior to the appearance of symptoms will vary according to how quickly they are isolated. Some studies suggest a substantial contribution of pre-symptomatic carriers to transmission: 73% in Wuhan and 62% in Tianjin, China; and 48% in Singapore.[4][5]'

'So far, few studies have attempted to investigate whether asymptomatic carriers are actually infectious to other people, and they have produced divergent results. One study in the town of Vo, Italy, found little difference in the viral load of symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers.[8] Another study in Nanchang, China, found that mild cases of COVID-19 had a lower viral load than severe cases and shed virus for a shorter period of time,[9] which raises the question of whether asymptomatic carriers also shed less virus. The modelling study which calculated that pre-symptomatic carriers in China generated 0.9 secondary infections also found that asymptomatic carriers generated only 0.1 secondary infections, contributing just 6% of all transmission events.[6]'

I think they should be mandatory for everybody, regardless of medical conditions

I think people show their true motives with posts like these . It shows that the real reason for the masks want , is that their social lives and holidays can resume as soon as possible. Its nothing to do with protecting the vulnerable as far as they are concerned.

If you use them properly, you're going to need multiple cloth ones (useless for people with glasses who would actually like to see) or alot of disposable surgical ones.
How are we expecting people on the breadline to pay for these

Benefit sanctions were reinstated last week. People who have to go to food banks arent going to be able to afford this.

Im sure they will be hounded for it though. Despite them not being the ones who continued to go on luxury ski trips/ cruises and Cheltenham despite the fact the virus was already well known about and well publicised.

I think there will be a lot of anger if the poor get targeted.

I’m just home from a head MRI. For those not familiar you’re in a tube where your shoulders touch the side, you have headphones and your head and shoulders are locked into place. Lots of people get claustrophobic and panic.

Today’s ordeal went up ten notches as I had to wear a mask INSIDE the tube. Fucking horrific.

@HeIenaDove

If you use them properly, you're going to need multiple cloth ones (useless for people with glasses who would actually like to see) or alot of disposable surgical ones. How are we expecting people on the breadline to pay for these

Benefit sanctions were reinstated last week. People who have to go to food banks arent going to be able to afford this.

Im sure they will be hounded for it though. Despite them not being the ones who continued to go on luxury ski trips/ cruises and Cheltenham despite the fact the virus was already well known about and well publicised.

I think there will be a lot of anger if the poor get targeted.

It is the poor that will suffer the most from people not wearing masks. Infection rates are significantly higher in deprived communities in part due to overcrowded conditions and many low paid jobs are public facing. If we have another lockdown it is many of these low paid jobs that will be lost first.

Masks can be made at home or purchased for less than £5 and one to wear whilst one is in the wash is all that is required. In my community people are making masks and donating them to those in need.