Face masks

[Terry - Somerset]

Sadly we have a police force which prefers to look on at law breaking rather than intervene and enforce the law:

- allow Black Lives Matter protests (irrespective of the campaigns merits)
- allow destruction and defacement of public monuments
- allow masses to descend on the beaches in fine weather
- apparently do little to enforce mask wearing on public transport

So expecting any police enforcement of mask wearing more generally is naive.

The main hope is that the retail sector will want to enforce mask wearing to protect compliant customers and staff. Perhaps there is a job opportunity for ex-bouncers currently unemployed due to the closure of bars and clubs :wink:

 

[Droogs]

Don't hold your breath on the retail sector doing it right either

2 days ago SWMBO rang the manager of our local Tesco to ask why half the people in the shop including staff were not wearing mask in accordance with the rules here in Scotland and was told "it's not our job to enforce mask wearing" so Ef 'em, they will never get another penny out of us and now we will go a mile further to get our groceries where they do enforce it.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

"Those who fail to comply with the new rules will face a fine of up to £100. This will be reduced to £50 if people pay within 14 days."

Why do they put these pathetic fines in place? Like many other fines (e.g disabled parking bays), it's low enough that people will just risk it.

Yes, it rather reminds me of years ago when our council announced proudly that they were putting an end to the problem of dog fouling - they'd increased the maximum fine from £50 to £500. The problem was that no one could ever remember anyone being prosecuted anyway.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Sadly we have a police force which prefers to look on at law breaking rather than intervene and enforce the law:

- allow Black Lives Matter protests (irrespective of the campaigns merits)
- allow destruction and defacement of public monuments
- allow masses to descend on the beaches in fine weather
- apparently do little to enforce mask wearing on public transport

So expecting any police enforcement of mask wearing more generally is naive.

The main hope is that the retail sector will want to enforce mask wearing to protect compliant customers and staff. Perhaps there is a job opportunity for ex-bouncers currently unemployed due to the closure of bars and clubs :wink:

They do what they are told to, and don't do what they are told not to. They were undoubtedly told to leave the BLM people alone. A neighbour, an ex sergeant, was involved in the St. Pauls riots in the early '80s - he said that they had just as well not have been there, as they were told under no circumstances were they to retaliate when threatened.
Of course, one problem they have as a police officer said on the radio a couple of days ago is that so far as masks, distancing etc. is concerned they haven't been told what is advice, some sort of regulation, or is actually a law.

 

[Rorschach]

"Those who fail to comply with the new rules will face a fine of up to £100. This will be reduced to £50 if people pay within 14 days."

Why do they put these pathetic fines in place? Like many other fines (e.g disabled parking bays), it's low enough that people will just risk it.

Yes, it rather reminds me of years ago when our council announced proudly that they were putting an end to the problem of dog fouling - they'd increased the maximum fine from £50 to £500. The problem was that no one could ever remember anyone being prosecuted anyway.

Here they are now going to fine you if you don't have poo bags with you when walking a dog. Of course the problems remains as before, those handing out the fines have no power to detain or to take your details, so if you tell them to sod off and walk away there is nothing they can do.

 

[profchris]

They could at least have insisted the people flying in from Wuhan and Iran wore them.

Unexpectedly, that would have done no good! Check out the final programme in BBC Radio 4's series "More or Less", which reports on research which indicates that almost every source of infection was from Italy, Spain or France.

I can see an argument, at the time, that all foreign arrivals should wear a mask. But that's easy to say, hard to know if they are foreign arrivals once they've left the airport, station or port. Lots of Italians live here and haven't left since last summer, whilst most of the infections from Italy are thought to have come via UK citizens returning from skiing holidays.

It's a pretty useful rule of thumb that if you have a complex problem (and I think we all agree the pandemic is complex), then any simple solution is almost certainly wrong, no matter how sensible it seems at first.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try those solutions, just that they need more thought and added complexity than at first appears.

 

[Nigel Burden]

Don't hold your breath on the retail sector doing it right either

2 days ago SWMBO rang the manager of our local Tesco to ask why half the people in the shop including staff were not wearing mask in accordance with the rules here in Scotland and was told "it's not our job to enforce mask wearing" so Ef 'em, they will never get another penny out of us and now we will go a mile further to get our groceries where they do enforce it.

Exactly the same down here in Dorset.

Tesco in Poole have removed all 2mtr and one way markers and there is no limit to the number of people allowed in the store. We haven't shopped in Tesco on a regular basis for about four years now. We now shop at Waitrose. The staff clean the trolleys before you use them, and social distancing is enforced. They also count customers in and out of the store, with a limit on the amount allowed in. All in all, a much better shopping experience.

Nigel.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Every day something else that you were free to do yesterday is forbidden today. And every new regulation, law and rule is applied forever.

The perennial problem - safety or freedom? Safety or freedom? Daddy or chips? The big questions are always tricky.

 

[selectortone]

The perennial problem - safety or freedom? Safety or freedom? Daddy or chips? The big questions are always tricky.

To paraphrase something I once read: making things safe for idiots just allows more idiots to breed.

 

[Lons]

To paraphrase something I once read: making things safe for idiots just allows more idiots to breed.

I've said it before, in the wild, animals and birds that are weak, naive or more stupid than those around them are killed off by predators thereby a selection of the strongest and most intelligent, humans on the other hand do the opposite with predictable results.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I rather have the feeling that there is an element of 'official over-correction' going on. In other words, having not really acted on warnings given a few years ago on the likelihood of a pandemic and how the country might cope with one, officialdom (politicians? scientists? advisors?) are now rather over-reacting, particularly by issuing dire warnings about second spikes and possible consequences.

I have not the first idea whether or not there will be a second spike, when, or how serious. I don't think anybody else does, either. I don't recall seeing any definitive scientific evidence that face masks make a significant difference - indeed, my (rather sceptical) reading of the various media reports suggests that the current evidence is patchy and inconclusive at best, and downright contradictory at worst. It seems to me that someone has persuaded government to mandate their use so as to be seen to be doing something.

Out of courtesy to others, I'll go along with the use of face masks in shops (I'll take it off again on leaving, though - I detest wearing the damn things!), but I resent being bullied into it by Big Government. I'd sooner they produced some rather more compelling evidence of their efficacy - but I suspect they can't.

I look forward to the resumption of our freedom to go about our lives normally at the earliest opportunity.

 

[RogerS]

I rather have the feeling that there is an element of 'official over-correction' going on. In other words, having not really acted on warnings given a few years ago on the likelihood of a pandemic and how the country might cope with one, officialdom (politicians? scientists? advisors?) are now rather over-reacting, particularly by issuing dire warnings about second spikes and possible consequences.

.....

An alternative viewpoint is that they are still trying to find the brewery while running around with reduced height.

 

[RogerS]

...

I look forward to the resumption of our freedom to go about our lives normally at the earliest opportunity.

Best ask Covid nicely to ease up a bit then. 'Cos it ain't going to happen any time soon. This is one helluva nasty virus and a lot of people (I'm thinking of one person in particular) still haven't grasped that fact.

 

[gregmcateer]

I've said it before, in the wild, animals and birds that are weak, naive or more stupid than those around them are killed off by predators thereby a selection of the strongest and most intelligent, humans on the other hand do the opposite with predictable results.

I have some sympathy with your sentiment, though the challenge for a civilised society is deciding which of the weak, naive or stupid are worthy of saving. If we just use the wild animal approach, by logical extension, we shouldn't really have doctors or hospitals, or even shops, farmers, factories etc. If we can't survive on our own, we don't survive. 'Someone' has to decide who is worth saving. Not 100% sure that worked so well in Europe in the 30's :?

 

[John Brown]

To paraphrase something I once read: making things safe for idiots just allows more idiots to breed.

I've said it before, in the wild, animals and birds that are weak, naive or more stupid than those around them are killed off by predators thereby a selection of the strongest and most intelligent, humans on the other hand do the opposite with predictable results.

Again, evolution does not necessarily "select" for intelligence.
Maybe that's why so many people misunderstand it.

 

[John Brown]

They could at least have insisted the people flying in from Wuhan and Iran wore them.

Unexpectedly, that would have done no good! Check out the final programme in BBC Radio 4's series "More or Less", which reports on research which indicates that almost every source of infection was from Italy, Spain or France.

I can see an argument, at the time, that all foreign arrivals should wear a mask. But that's easy to say, hard to know if they are foreign arrivals once they've left the airport, station or port. Lots of Italians live here and haven't left since last summer, whilst most of the infections from Italy are thought to have come via UK citizens returning from skiing holidays.

It's a pretty useful rule of thumb that if you have a complex problem (and I think we all agree the pandemic is complex), then any simple solution is almost certainly wrong, no matter how sensible it seems at first.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try those solutions, just that they need more thought and added complexity than at first appears.

Occam's beard, perhaps.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Best ask Covid nicely to ease up a bit then. 'Cos it ain't going to happen any time soon. This is one helluva nasty virus and a lot of people (I'm thinking of one person in particular) still haven't grasped that fact.

Ignore the propaganda headline: look at the chart. Now consider that no one dies of anything except Coronavirus.

And finally,

Deaths in the UK return to normal levels
Figures released on Tuesday 14 July by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show the number of deaths from all causes registered in a single week has stayed below the five-year average for the third consecutive week.

The above is official BBC propaganda, so must be true: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51768274

So the question is: are we still in the grip of an appalling, lethal epidemic, or is it actually over, all bar the shouting?

 

[Rorschach]

This is one helluva nasty virus and a lot of people (I'm thinking of one person in particular) still haven't grasped that fact.

Would that be me

Nasty compared to? Rabies? Ebola? HIV? Small Pox? MERS? Sars Cov 1? Even common rota virus used to kill half a million children every year!
C19 is not even as nasty as the 1918 Spanish Flu which although it likely had a lower case mortality rate, it killed the young and healthy (fact, not opinion, look it up).
Get some perspective Roger.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Nasty compared to? Rabies? Ebola? HIV? Small Pox? MERS?

I often consider myxomatos - now that is a properly dangerous disease, If you are a scared ikkle wabbit.

Myxomatosis is the name of the severe and often fatal disease in European rabbits caused by the myxoma virus. Different strains exist which vary in their virulence. The Californian strain, which is endemic to the west coast of the United States and Baja in Mexico, is the most virulent, with reported case fatality rates of 100%

 

[Phil Pascoe]

One of my late uncle's first jobs on joining the navy in the mid '50s was clubbing rabbits with myxy on Dartmoor.