Wearing face masks or coverings on public transport to be mandatory from June 15th

[Reorte]

4 hours ago, Lantavian said:

 

42,000 deaths in the UK -- far higher than most other countries -- and you still believe that?

 

 

For various reasons, yes, or at least the case still isn't terribly strong. Lots of people are making assumptions about why the death rate is what it is but there are several hypotheses, none of them proven. The UK has a dense (in terms of population density, not intelligence - no comment of that!), fairly elderly, fairly unhealthy population, which may or may not be enough to explain a lot of it.

 

To have a good idea you'd need to have a pretty good idea of how most infections are occuring, and that seems somewhat questionable. Is just breathing out spreading it, or is it really coughs and sneezes? If it's the latter masks aren't going to achieve much for example, especially if you're not face to face with people and close to them. Breath will spread further without one but far enough to make any difference?

[SM42]

14 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

We must trust our fellow human beings on this.  That is all the law allows us to do. And we must not become a nation of vigilantes as seemed to occur in the "first wave" of lockdown when anyone seen outdoors or not known in the area seemed to be fair game for the curtain-twitchers and keyboard-warriors.   

 

As the hashtag has it - be kind.  

 

 

This is the key, but the problem is that almost everyone has become suspicious of everyone. Some tut and move on, some take no notice, some make a fuss, some just can't help being rebels and some just can't stop  and think for a minute. 

 

I think I and many I know  (and I suspect the majority) fall between the first and second. A dose of self preservation may be thrown into the mix. .

 

Society in general has become more judgemental. Anonymity via the web has  made this worse. I am not to judge, and I don't think it is incumbent on transport staff to judge either in this case. Dodgy groups who obviously didn't belong to the same household were obvious to spot. getting too close, easy to spot. That legal exemption not so.

 

The problem is as always. Emergency legislation, quickly drafted, trying to cover all eventualities. The railway Rule Book doesn't cover everything perfectly (and that took many years to develope to what it is today,) and so at some point the staff have to make judgements in the spririt of the rule as the rule doesn't 100% apply or is physically impossible.

 

In the end, as Gwiwer said, we have to trust people to comply and we have to trust the enforcers (whoever they may be) to tread the tightrope with expertise. They may lose their balance occcasionally and, when they do, we all need to have a little perspective. So you have an exemption. Calmly explain that, if challenged. Don't go flying off shouting the odds and claiming some form of discrimination or slander (Sadly an all too popular reaction these days) likewise those challenging need to give the benefit of the doubt.

 

It never ceases to amaze me how many put bad things down to malice rather than ignorance of the circumstances

 

The idiots? the disgruntled? the conspiracy theorists? No hope there. Just need to be good at diffusing the situation. Escalation does no-one any favours

 

Andy

[JohnDMJ]

 

15 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

For various reasons, yes, or at least the case still isn't terribly strong. Lots of people are making assumptions about why the death rate is what it is but there are several hypotheses, none of them proven. The UK has a dense (in terms of population density, not intelligence - no comment of that!), fairly elderly, fairly unhealthy population, which may or may not be enough to explain a lot of it.

 

To have a good idea you'd need to have a pretty good idea of how most infections are occuring, and that seems somewhat questionable. Is just breathing out spreading it, or is it really coughs and sneezes? If it's the latter masks aren't going to achieve much for example, especially if you're not face to face with people and close to them. Breath will spread further without one but far enough to make any difference?

 

In general,  are viruses airbourne or spread by contact? If by contact, masks will have no effect!

[Reorte]

4 minutes ago, SM42 said:

In the end, as Gwiwer said, we have to trust people to comply and we have to trust the enforcers (whoever they may be) to tread the tightrope with expertise. They may lose their balance occcasionally and, when they do, we all need to have a little perspective. So you have an exemption. Calmly explain that, if challenged. Don't go flying off shouting the odds and claiming some form of discrimination or slander (Sadly an all too popular reaction these days) likewise those challenging need to give the benefit of the doubt.

 

Definitely this. It is all about trust. The key to trust and hence cooperation is for people to think you've got it right most of the time, then you'll get the benefit of doubt the rest of the time (which is why there's a fine balance to be struck between being under and overcautions - the former destroys trust because you get perceived as too careless and disregarding, the latter and things start to get dismissed as being over the top, even where they're not).

 

Quote

It never ceases to amaze me how many put bad things down to malice rather than ignorance of the circumstances

 

Very true, and it seems to be another artefact of increasing polarisation and seeing things in very simple black and white, good and bad terms. Adapt as circumstances change? "U-turn!" Admit to balances of aspects from both sides (or that there's more than one side)? "Inconsistent, doesn't understand his own position!" Make a mistake (and for heaven's sake don't own up to it - that just attracts even more abuse) or get a fact wrong? "Murderer!" "Liar!!"

[Reorte]

9 minutes ago, JohnDMJ said:

 

In general,  are viruses airbourne or spread by contact? If by contact, masks will have no effect!

 

AFAICT airbourne is the most common source. I can't find it right now but I saw somewhere that how long you're near someone also plays quite a big part in the likelihood of passing it on, which could well lead to the conclusion that masks are pointless a lot of the time (especially if a little bit of simple care is taken, like where you cough and sneeze if you have to - surely you can get people to do that if you can get them to wear masks), but that still leaves a case being made for wearing them on public transport, especially as the number of people travelling increases. And as unpopular as it is, you still need common sense when people use masks - how many will move it out of the way to have a sneeze?

 

How much truth is there in the old "coughs and sneezes spread diseases"? Yes, I'm sure they do, but how much does just breathing normally contribute?

 

[SM42]

4 hours ago, Lantavian said:

 

42,000 deaths in the UK -- far higher than most other countries -- and you still believe that?

 

 

 

I think the idea that a face mask is the key to reducing deaths/ infections is not proven to be of major incremental benefit. Poland for instance has had only 1300 recorded deaths. Face mask wearing was introduced there quite late on I believe and the requirements have now been eased.

The phsycological effect is quite large though in giving a confidence to wearers to go out in the big bad world again.

 

Why Asian countries are so wedded to the concept I don't know. Each culture is different. Why are some mainland Europeans convinced that cold air or a draught will make you ill? Perhaps there is more to it than just disease control. Pollution may be the first concern and the leap is easy to make to infection control especially when you see doctors wearing them. 

To the average person in the street, I suspect, that exposure to airborne viruses is relatively low. The mask will reduce this by reducing the amount or range of that expelled by those infected.

Heart surgeons don't wear a mask to protect themselves from catching heart disease from their patients. they do it to minimise infection from them to their patient. Early face mask wearers I  know were convinced it would protect them from us, but it was more likely the other way around.

 

In medical settings the risk is much higher. The viral concentrations are higher and therefore more protection is required. Perhaps if it's good enough for the medicos then it's good enough for  us comes into it.

 

Andy

[SM42]

1 hour ago, Lantavian said:

 

Asian societies tend to be communally minded. People wear masks, when suffering from colds, etc, to protect other people from them.

 

Western societies tend to be individualistic. People wear masks to protect themselves from other people.

 

Here in Hong Kong people started wearing masks voluntarily before the government required it. People remember SARS: half of the global total of SARS deaths were in Hong Kong.

 

People took covid-19 seriously very early on here as a potential pandemic. Shops banned people without masks. Buildings started giving out free hand sanitiser to occupants and visitors

 

 

A cultural difference I had not considered. Thank You

 

Your  first line highlights the effectiveness of mask wearing is, in general, to protect not the user, but others

 

I think the SARS experience certainly helped South East Asia. The lessons had been learnt.

 

In Europe it all seemed so far away, SARS didn't get here,  This won't. Complacency was the enemy. The warnings for the UK were there back in 2016. Nothing was done.  The flu comparison is valid in some ways (method of transmission, respiratory illness, basic protection through hygeine etc) the big difference is no-one has any immunity from this one. Everyone is a potential victim and there are some as yet to be undertsood effects on certain people.

 

I would be interested to know, what were people in HK doing this time last year before all this started. Was mask wearing widespread as a natural thing to do everyday or was there a more patchy useage?

 

I also suspect that countries in that region have populations that have a stronger culture of  listening to the governments instructions. Certainly I've seen that reported for places like Singapore and South Korea; countries that also have coped well.

 

Here many don't seem to care what the government says

 

Andy

 

[Gwiwer]

6 minutes ago, SM42 said:

I would be interested to know, what were people in HK doing this time last year before all this started. Was mask wearing widespread as a natural thing to do everyday or was there a more patchy useage?

 

I also suspect that countries in that region have populations that have a stronger culture of  listening to the governments instructions. Certainly I've seen that reported for places like Singapore and South Korea; countries that also have coped well.

 

I understand it has been a part of culture in most, if not all, nations in that part of the world to wear a facial covering at any time one feels unwell.  It is considered disrespectful to potentially share ones' germs with others.  Some of the cities in that region have significant numbers of densely-packed high-occupancy high-rise blocks where infection can spread very rapidly if unchecked.  There are very few areas of the UK which match that - and few enough which are remotely close.  

 

That culture has not existed in the UK although this emergency might change things in the future.  

 

Another cultural difference is the varying levels of (dis)respect that people have for their governments and - just as much - the credibility those governments have with their people.

 

It may be no accident that New Zealand has come out of this rather well.  They have a hugely respected leader who has proven herself not afraid to make tough calls and behaves as a leader.  In the UK you will find many opinions but there is a sense of the headless-chicken syndrome about the present government.  They were duly elected however and the alternatives on offer at the time didn't appeal to nearly enough of those who voted for change to arise.  

 

So here we are.  "Advice" rather than "Instruction" from Day One.  

 

And now, after several U-turns in scientific opinion and with the benefits still not being clearly proven, mandatory face coverings on public transport which will not be policed by operator's staff (who have in at least some cases been explicitly reminded of that matter) and which the Government expects to be self-regulating.  Trust, in other words, and respect for those not covering up and who may well have a legitimate reason; they don't need to be interrogated, harassed or shamed.  

[BR(S)]

26 minutes ago, SM42 said:

In Europe it all seemed so far away, SARS didn't get here,  This won't. Complacency was the enemy. The warnings for the UK were there back in 2016. Nothing was done.  The flu comparison is valid in some ways (method of transmission, respiratory illness, basic protection through hygeine etc) the big difference is no-one has any immunity from this one. Everyone is a potential victim and there are some as yet to be undertsood effects on certain people.

 

I would say complacency was one of the single biggest factors in the spread here (and other countries).  We had lots of data coming out of countries who experienced the virus before us, but failed to act on it as there was a general "It'll never happen to us" response (I was just as guilty, even booking [fully refundable!!] holiday hotels abroad while it was clearly unfolding).  I would say this was enhanced by a UK-wide cultural attitude that we now have to experience problems before we deal with them; the government have not been great in handling this, but I do have sympathy with them that, had they acted on data from other countries and closed the UK earlier, before any of us had knowingly experienced the virus, they would have heard "You've pointlessly ruined our economy" comments for evermore.  It's a sad state of affairs this "Twitter politics".

 

This is going way off topic, but I'd say where we find ourselves now is in some ways a more ideal situation than say New Zealand.  This is on the basis that the virus isn't going anywhere (Covid-19 is likely to become an illness in the way flu or a cold is) and we simply can't keep the world shut down indefinitely to eradicate it, as that cure would be worse than the problem.  It has made its way through our nation, now infects on what seems to be a consistent level, we know who needs to avoid it through shielding and we seem so far to have allowed our healthcare system to adapt.  If we can keep it ticking over in a consistent, controlled way, at hopefully an even lower level, we can learn to live with it and we might achieve "herd immunity" in time (though I am no expert in that, only knowing it is gradually being thought to be much higher than reckoned and it doesn't always require antibodies, with T cells and partial immunity caused by other coronaviruses in the mix).  For New Zealand, they appear to have suppressed the virus, but at what point in a country heavily reliant on income from tourism do they open their borders with no vaccine or a host of useful treatments?  

 

[monkeysarefun]

6 hours ago, BR(S) said:

 

  For New Zealand, they appear to have suppressed the virus, but at what point in a country heavily reliant on income from tourism do they open their borders with no vaccine or a host of useful treatments?  

 

 

There is likely to be a "travel bubble" between Australia ans NZ in the near future since both of us have eliminated community spread, other than some small persistent outbreaks in Victoria.

 

Our (NSW) source of new infections is from returning overseas travellers who are tested during their compulsory  2 week quarantine. There is a persistent 1 to 10 new cases picked up daily which shows the importance of the quarantine.  And its no - nonsense here, met by police/armed forces at the airport and escorted to a hotel which is monitored by federal and state police, and the risk of jail time and heavy fines if you do manage to escape..

 

Here there has been a very high acceptance of and compliance with the government measures and apart from a hand full of  loonies, no protests about the lockdowns.

 

In  this regard I actually think that the recent bushfire experience helped. Although the Federal government was a joke, the state premiers put in the hard yards during the crisis and generally came out looking competent. When the virus hit a month later, again the Federal government looked like they were going to shirk the hard stuff but it was the NSW and Vic premiers who said they were enforcing early lockdowns and so on, pulling the Federal government along with them.

 

  By the time the lockdowns came into being we'd all already had experience of being shut inside for weeks  (due to the toxic smoke) and  travel restrictions (due to emergency declarations closing vast areas of the state and all major roads) so it wasn't such a huge leap to undertake again. Apart from the Bondi Beach thing (which turned out to be mainly European backpackers rather than locals) the compliance has been very high and generally good natured.

 

Just the toilet paper thing sucked.

 

We never had to wear masks, the 'Official" advice see sawed continuously  between its a good idea and its no benefit. Many of us have a stack of masks leftover from the smoke emercency, 2 boxes  are still taking up space in my laundry!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by monkeysarefun

[Butler Henderson]

The worse place is Belgium where (Fridays figures) there had been 837 deaths / 1 million.  The UK was 626, then countries with more than 100 deaths / 1 million were Spain 580, Italy 571, Sweden 500, France 454, USA 366, Netherlands 355, Ireland 347, Ecuador 236, Brazil 228, Peru 226, Switzerland 226, Chile 214, Canada 221, Mexico 153, Portugal 150, Iran 112, Germany 107.

 

[Taigatrommel]

On 20/06/2020 at 10:27, Lantavian said:

To use the Singaporean term, you are "talking cock".

 

And that sums up the entire 14 pages I've just read through.

[Gibbo675]

Hi Folks,

 

Here is video by a woman that obviously thinks she is helping,  do you think that such measures will contain the spread or just placate the mind ?

 

 

Gibbo.

[billbedford]

On 20/06/2020 at 17:46, BR(S) said:

 

 For New Zealand, they appear to have suppressed the virus, but at what point in a country heavily reliant on income from tourism do they open their borders with no vaccine or a host of useful treatments?  

 

 

Coronaviruses usually are most virulent between mid-winter and late spring, so The NewZealand and Australian governments would be wise to wait until, say November, before boasting that their countries are Covid-free.  

[monkeysarefun]

13 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

Coronaviruses usually are most virulent between mid-winter and late spring, so The NewZealand and Australian governments would be wise to wait until, say November, before boasting that their countries are Covid-free.  

 

Has there been boasting? I'm not aware of it, both countries are still fighting potential outbreaks (NZ caused by two sisters returning from the UK who travelled around while positive) and we have a small outbreak popped up in Vic, which has resulted in local area shutdowns, door to door testing  and extended contact tracing.

 

So very much no self-congratulations or laurel resting going on yet - the only sign of that I've heard has been from Donald Trump.

[billbedford]

Yep

[monkeysarefun]

25 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Yep

 

 

I'm sorry, I don't get the boasting bit? Basically she is announcing to her fellow New Zealanders that NZ will soon be able to end their  intense lockdown but they still need to be very careful and there will still be cases to track down. 

 

Boasting to me means excessive self congratulation , not  accurate  imparting information about the current status and future potential issues.

Edited June 22, 2020 by monkeysarefun

[Gibbo675]

On 21/06/2020 at 13:02, Butler Henderson said:

The worse place is Belgium where (Fridays figures) there had been 837 deaths / 1 million.  The UK was 626, then countries with more than 100 deaths / 1 million were Spain 580, Italy 571, Sweden 500, France 454, USA 366, Netherlands 355, Ireland 347, Ecuador 236, Brazil 228, Peru 226, Switzerland 226, Chile 214, Canada 221, Mexico 153, Portugal 150, Iran 112, Germany 107.

 

Hi There,

 

Looking at your figures it would seem that the death expressed in percentage terms are pretty small. For instance the figure for the UK of 626 per million is actually 0.000626%, or to put it another way a little over six ten thousandths of one percent.

 

The rate of asymptomatic responses are around 80% or to put that another way 800,000 per million.

 

I would put the risk of falling down the stairs considerably higher than 0.000626%.

 

Gibbo.

[Reorte]

35 minutes ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi There,

 

Looking at your figures it would seem that the death expressed in percentage terms are pretty small. For instance the figure for the UK of 626 per million is actually 0.000626%, or to put it another way a little over six ten thousandths of one percent.

 

The rate of asymptomatic responses are around 80% or to put that another way 800,000 per million.

 

I would put the risk of falling down the stairs considerably higher than 0.000626%.

 

626 per million is 0.0626%.

[boxbrownie]

Too busy watching those stairs rather than the calculator buttons.....

[Gibbo675]

5 hours ago, Reorte said:

626 per million is 0.0626%.

Hi Reorte,

 

In your clamour to correct my poor mathematics (ooops how remiss of me, what could I possibly have been thinking about) I note that you can see that such a small number sounds so much less frightening than forty odd thousand as the news likes to tell you.

 

What do you think the uptake of mask wearing would be if the news purveyed such small numbers ?

 

Look on the bright side though the correct 80% figure, or if you like, 800000 out of every million that get it are just fine and healthy as you very likely are.

 

Gibbo.

 

 

[Reorte]

You're asking me? I'm not particularly worried about it and never have been; the personal risk to me hasn't ever been high enough for me to be concerned. But it very much is for some people, which is why I've gone along with things willingly enough. Still not really persuaded about masks though.

[Sidecar Racer]

Meanwhile , in America , 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-53174415/they-want-to-throw-god-s-wonderful-breathing-system-out

[Pete the Elaner]

Is wearing a face covering on public transport such a big deal? It is not like were being asked to cover up when doing hard excercise.

 

When filling a train, it is not always possible to insist people space themselves apart. Sitting next to somebody could potentially allow a steady flow of virus cells to be passed on over a period of time, accumulating more than a brief exposure in somewhere like a supermarket, where we can also distance ourselves a little more.

[Mark Saunders]

1 hour ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Is wearing a face covering on public transport such a big deal? It is not like were being asked to cover up when doing hard excercise.

 

I think the main problem with some is the length of the journey!