advertisement


Facemasks Forever?

droodzilla

droodzilla

pfm Member
Is there a case for making the requirement to wear facemasks in enclosed public spaces permanent?

Or at least strongly encouraging it in Winter.

The argument is that they stop the spread of disease via droplets so, even in a normal flu season, they could save a few thousand lives per year.

A friend of mine asked the question and I don't have a ready answer. I don't like wearing a facemask, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I've also been surprised by how quickly it's become normal and accepted, after feeling like a pillock the first time I wore mine in public.

So, suppose there was solid evidence that masking up in Winter would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it?
 
That's a dilemma. Like you, I don't like wearing them, and I also get annoyed at the muppets who don't wear them properly, or at all. But I'm also fairly sure there are rather too many of us on this planet, and while I applaud each medical advance, I do worry that it hastens the coming crisis.
 
I don't know the answer, but I distinctly remember right at the start of the COVID pandemic various UK authorities saying facemasks were a waste of time. I'm not sure on what evidence this, or indeed the subsequent reversal of UK policy, was based, but we all seem to accept them now without question. They are fast becoming a major pollutant.
 
So, suppose there was solid evidence that introducing food rationing would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like eating food à la World War 2, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that banning driving in cities would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like using the smelly slow old bus, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that making exercise compulsory would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I much prefer to play computer games, but I don't see the requirement to begin each morning with a vigorous workout in a public square, managed by the police, as a threat to my liberty in a public health emergency. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted, especially if it was accompanied by some morally inspiring song singing . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that forcing people who have space in their homes to give it to people who are homeless would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like living in one room or sharing my house with all sorts, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that allowing the security services constant access to my internet activity would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like the idea of big brother watching me, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public emergency as a threat to my liberty, and it may well catch lots of nasty potential terrorists and pedophiles. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .
 
I don’t have a problem with it, such measures have been adopted by other countries. Apparently mask wearing is the least effective measure though; social distancing & hand washing more effective.

My main concern is that non mask wearers are easily recognised & will be demonised by polite society. We never miss an opportunity in this country to act superior so this provides another means.
 
mandryka said:
So, suppose there was solid evidence that introducing food rationing would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like eating food à la World War 2, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that banning driving in cities would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like using the smelly slow old bus, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that making exercise compulsory would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I much prefer to play computer games, but I don't see the requirement to begin each morning with a vigorous workout in a public square, managed by the police, as a threat to my liberty in a public health emergency. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted, especially if it was accompanied by some song singing . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that forcing people who have space in their homes to give it to people who are homeless would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like living in one room or sharing my house with all sorts, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that allowing the security services constant access to my internet activity would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like the idea of big brother watching me, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public emergency as a threat to my liberty, and it may well catch lots of nasty potential terrorists and pedophiles. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .
Click to expand...
Classic slippery slippery slope-iness. Forget compulsion. I'm no fan of that either.

Should we encourage people to mask up in shops in Winter, through publicity campaigns and so forth. Just as we do with healthy eating and exercise.
 
Woodface said:
I don’t have a problem with it, such measures have been adopted by other countries. Apparently mask wearing is the least effective measure though; social distancing & hand washing more effective.

My main concern is that non mask wearers are easily recognised & will be demonised by polite society. We never miss an opportunity in this country to act superior so this provides another means.
Click to expand...
Yes, definitely a concern. Don't wanna go all "snitch on your neighbours". Already seen enough of that during the pandemic.
 
mandryka said:
So, suppose there was solid evidence that introducing food rationing would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like eating food à la World War 2, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that banning driving in cities would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like using the smelly slow old bus, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public health emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that making exercise compulsory would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I much prefer to play computer games, but I don't see the requirement to begin each morning with a vigorous workout in a public square, managed by the police, as a threat to my liberty in a public health emergency. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted, especially if it was accompanied by some morally inspiring song singing . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that forcing people who have space in their homes to give it to people who are homeless would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like living in one room or sharing my house with all sorts, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public emergency as a threat to my liberty. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .

And suppose there was solid evidence that allowing the security services constant access to my internet activity would save 5000 lives each year. Would you support it? I don't like the idea of big brother watching me, but I don't see the requirement to do so in a public emergency as a threat to my liberty, and it may well catch lots of nasty potential terrorists and pedophiles. I'm sure it would quickly become normal and accepted . . .
Click to expand...
To think of all the poor electrons inconvenienced by posting this....cripes.
 
Regardless of government mandates, I think public mask wearing is here to stay for those more vulnerable and for many who will simply choose to do so.

About the only silver lining of COVID 19 restrictions has been a corresponding reduction in the transmission of colds, flu and other airborne illness. I hate wearing a mask, but have been free of respiratory infection for well over a year. I would love to keep it that way, but don’t want to become paranoid. Guess we each have to track current recommendations, but ultimately make our own risk/reward decisions.
 
droodzilla said:
Is there a case for making the requirement to wear facemasks in enclosed public spaces permanent?
Click to expand...

No, none whatsoever under currently foreseeable circumstances.
Any suggestion otherwise is coming from someone living with the fairies, or the conspiracy theorists.

Don't want to catch C19 or any of its mutants? Get vaccinated. I have less than no sympathy with anyone who does otherwise.
 
Tony L said:
It is quite normal in Japan and I think Hong Kong and other places. I suspect it is a reason they did well regarding overall death toll despite an ageing population and very high population density areas. The culture and wider understanding was already in place.
Click to expand...
That's what I thought. I'm guessing it's not compulsory but it's widely adopted as a public health precaution.

I'd be open to it (I think!), if it were expected in the UK, but I wouldn't do it off my own bat for fear of looking daft.
 
Everywhere you go in the world Japanese tourists are always masked.
I doubt there is any compulsion, it has just become a socially accepted norm.
 
droodzilla said:
That's what I thought. I'm guessing it's not compulsory but it's widely adopted as a public health precaution.

I'd be open to it (I think!), if it were expected in the UK, but I wouldn't do it off my own bat for fear of looking daft.
Click to expand...
Yes, I remember the first time I wore one, very self-consciously. Now, it's done almost without thinking (though still something I dislike). IIRC mask wearing in the Far East became a thing ~20 years ago during the first SARS scare, and as you say, has become something of a norm.

Maybe we could have a virus count, a bit like the pollen count, with the evening weather forecast, and a reminder that it would be a good idea to wear a mask at those times of the year when the virus levels in the wild are rising.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Yes, I remember the first time I wore one, very self-consciously. Now, it's done almost without thinking (though still something I dislike). IIRC mask wearing in the Far East became a thing ~20 years ago during the first SARS scare, and as you say, has become something of a norm.

Maybe we could have a virus count, a bit like the pollen count, with the evening weather forecast, and a reminder that it would be a good idea to wear a mask at those times of the year when the virus levels in the wild are rising.
Click to expand...
That's the kind of constructive thinking I was hoping for when I started the thread.

I'm not wedded to the idea of facemasks forever, but I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand, either.
 
If it is a choice, I have no issue with people choosing to wear face coverings. As others have alluded to once the law prescribes a certain action in the public good, it soon follows that many prescriptions and proscriptions follow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top