# Face coverings to be mandatory in shops



## odyssey06

Face coverings to be made mandatory in shops, following a meeting of cabinet this evening.
Ministers approved the proposal to extend the regulation requiring face coverings on public transport – which came in to effect on Monday.
Taoiseach Micheál Martin confirmed the move this evening, saying that face coverings will be mandatory in shops for both shoppers and staff, unless a screen is in place.









						Face coverings to be made mandatory in shops, Taoiseach confirms
					

Ministers approved the proposal at cabinet this evening.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## geri

Every shop I have been in, big supermarket or small local shop has a screen in place at the counter.  Does it mean face masks are not mandatory in these shops?


----------



## odyssey06

Good question I interpreted it to mean that the staff behind a screen wouldn't need to wear one, but customers would still need to wear a mask as they would be coming close to other customers \ staff members on the floor.


----------



## Ravima

geri said:


> Every shop I have been in, big supermarket or small local shop has a screen in place at the counter.  Does it mean face masks are not mandatory in these shops?


customers must wear


----------



## geri

It's not clear from the journal. Maybe it's a punctuation thing.


----------



## EmmDee

geri said:


> It's not clear from the journal. Maybe it's a punctuation thing.



Just wear a mask.

I don't understand why folk immediately start looking for loopholes every time. The advice and intention is clear... If you're going to be indoors wear a mask.


----------



## geri

Just because I ask a question, does not mean I am looking for a loophole.


----------



## Leper

If anybody feels the wearing of a face mask to be uncomfortable, they sure could be more uncomfortable  wearing a respirator mask later.


----------



## Purple

Leper said:


> If anybody feels the wearing of a face mask to be uncomfortable, they sure could be more uncomfortable  wearing a respirator mask later.


Well aren't you the ray of sunshine!


----------



## IsleOfMan

Leper said:


> If anybody feels the wearing of a face mask to be uncomfortable, they sure could be more uncomfortable wearing a respirator mask later



I see your views have changed Leper.  This is what you said on another thread. Why the change in thinking?

"In Hong Kong, Beijing, Xi'an, Shanghai and most other cities in that part of the world people have been wearing face masks for years. You see they have been living with Smog continuously.

. . . . . and to answer your question I won't be wearing a face mask or plastic gloves mainly because (i) they are almost ineffective and (ii) people working in health care (not just in hospitals) need such protection and I won't contribute to any scarcity"





__





						Physical Distancing
					

Interesting piece about physical distancing on RTÉ’s 9pm news last night.  Some lab demonstrating the passage of respiratory droplets using a high speed camera.  When the subject was breathing normally(through the nose with mouth closed), droplets came out of the nose at a speed and trajectory...



					askaboutmoney.com


----------



## odyssey06

I don't think there is any shortages now of gloves \ surgical masks - except perhaps the H95 respirator style masks.


----------



## Mouldy

geri said:


> Just because I ask a question, does not mean I am looking for a loophole.


Don't be asking questions. I've done my research and according to Twitter replies, Ireland has the highest proportion of Epidemiologist Travel Experts in the world, if not the universe. If there are questions to be asked, they will ask them, then answer them, then send a mob to your house if you disagree with them.


----------



## Leper

IsleOfMan said:


> I see your views have changed Leper.  This is what you said on another thread. Why the change in thinking?
> 
> "In Hong Kong, Beijing, Xi'an, Shanghai and most other cities in that part of the world people have been wearing face masks for years. You see they have been living with Smog continuously.
> 
> . . . . . and to answer your question I won't be wearing a face mask or plastic gloves mainly because (i) they are almost ineffective and (ii) people working in health care (not just in hospitals) need such protection and I won't contribute to any scarcity"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Physical Distancing
> 
> 
> Interesting piece about physical distancing on RTÉ’s 9pm news last night.  Some lab demonstrating the passage of respiratory droplets using a high speed camera.  When the subject was breathing normally(through the nose with mouth closed), droplets came out of the nose at a speed and trajectory...
> 
> 
> 
> askaboutmoney.com


You're right, my views have changed along with other changes that have happened. When the pandemic started in Ireland we were advised that wearing of face masks was not necessary because of the restrictions that were in place. The R number has risen.

Things have changed since and if buses are to be allowed "extra" passengers and supermarkets becoming busier the wearing of face masks is now a necessity for the safety of everybody. I am wearing a face mask when I visit any shop. Failing to do is is now irresponsible.

Thanks for letting me clear up the issue.


----------



## IsleOfMan

Leper said:


> You're right, my views have changed



If everybody had worn face masks from the beginning maybe we might have saved a few lives. Pity you and others were so determined not to in the beginning.  To state that the wearing of face masks in Asia was down to "smog", beggars belief.


----------



## losttheplot

IsleOfMan said:


> If everybody had worn face masks from the beginning maybe we might have saved a few lives. Pity you and others were so determined not to in the beginning.  To state that the wearing of face masks in Asia was down to "smog", beggars belief.


There were extreme shortages of masks in the beginning and  mixed signals about their effectiveness.


----------



## Leper

IsleOfMan said:


> If everybody had worn face masks from the beginning maybe we might have saved a few lives. Pity you and others were so determined not to in the beginning.  To state that the wearing of face masks in Asia was down to "smog", beggars belief.


1. For years before Covid-19 cities like Beijing, Xi'an, Shanghai were blighted with smog. Many of the inhabitants wore face masks then. I'm sorry you didn't know this. You'd even notice many Asian people in Ireland wearing face masks back then too.
2. "If everybody had worn face masks from the beginning . . . .Pity you and others were so determined not to . . .(a) You don't know that lives could have been saved. (b) You don't know that the situation could have been worse. I took the advice of our Covid-19 Advisors on the situation and I have no regrets.
3. "beggars belief" - You've lost me there.


----------



## odyssey06

Mask wearing in Asia also increased after the last SARS outbreak.


----------



## mathepac

Apart from PPE, is there any chance Blessed Martin could appoint a Minister for Sensible Heads, as they seem to be in short supply. Dunnes stores Rathdowney Co Laois this afternoon, no staff member wearing masks, not one single uniformed person whether behind plastic shields or in free circulation re-stocking shelves or standing around in groups of three or four chatting and blocking aisles wore masks; most of the customers not bothered with either masks or hand-sanitisation.  I asked a staff member standing inside the exit/entrance what the story was and he launched into a story about his asthma and masks and awaiting legal guidance from those above.  God help us.

In contrast, in SuperValu a few hundred metres away, all staff members and most customers wore masks and gloves and the store has been redesigned with the old entrance now one-way and a new one-way exit.  Well done SuperValu.

I know I'm a late convert, but anything we can do to try to avoid another pandemic surge is worth doing, unless you work or shop in Dunnes.


----------



## odyssey06

mathepac said:


> Apart from PPE, is there any chance Blessed Martin could appoint a Minister for Sensible Heads, as they seem to be in short supply. Dunnes stores Rathdowney Co Laois this afternoon, no staff member wearing masks, not one single uniformed person whether behind plastic shields or in free circulation re-stocking shelves or standing around in groups of three or four chatting and blocking aisles wore masks; most of the customers not bothered with either masks or hand-sanitisation.  I asked a staff member standing inside the exit/entrance what the story was and he launched into a story about his asthma and masks and awaiting legal guidance from those above.  God help us.



If their asthma is that bad they can't use a cloth face covering, they shouldn't be working in a public setting in an outbreak of a severe respiratory virus.

_"If a patient’s asthma is so severe that a standard cloth mask prevents them from breathing properly — which she says only includes about 1 percent of asthma patients — then they should be staying home anyway since the risk of them developing severe COVID-19 symptoms may be higher. "
 - Sally Wenzel, the director of the University of Pittsburgh Asthma Institute at UPMC _


----------



## Sophrosyne

Don't patronize stores you feel are unsafe.

They'll quickly get the message when they lose custom to businesses that are more fastidious in enforcing safety measures.


----------



## mathepac

No problem taking my custom elsewhere as I don't have any particular favourites.  More of the same from unions and shop-owner reps https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0716/1153645-phase-4-coronavirus-covid19/


----------



## mathepac

Sophrosyne said:


> They'll quickly get the message when they lose custom to businesses that are more fastidious in enforcing safety measures.


It's not about enforcement or "policing" as the RTE report quotes some reps as saying, good example and a caring attitude can change behaviour. If not then let's try a few sticks!


----------



## IsleOfMan

Leper said:


> For years before Covid-19 cities like Beijing, Xi'an, Shanghai were blighted with smog. Many of the inhabitants wore face masks then. I'm sorry you didn't know this. You'd even notice many Asian people in Ireland wearing face masks back then too


My son lived in Beijing for 3 years so I know all about the poor air quality there. He now lives in Hong Kong but has visited many Chinese cities. Yes, the air quality was poor but that is not the only reason why people wore masks. One of the reasons they wore masks was out of consideration to others. As you said "You'd even notice many Asian people in Ireland wearing face masks back then too". As Ireland had no "smog" why do you think that these people were wearing masks?

I have been wearing a mask in supermarkets since early March. These were available online, there were also builder's type masks available in Woodies, Brooks and other similar shops. 



odyssey06 said:


> Mask wearing in Asia also increased after the last SARS outbreak.



Leper, I see that you gave a thumbs up to this post. If you support this statement then I am surprised that you were not one of the first people to wear a mask back in early March. Your comment "I won't be wearing a face mask or plastic gloves mainly because (i) they are almost ineffective" seems to suggest that you are going to stick with the "smog" theory on the one hand but accept that they were also worn because of the SARS outbreak.



Leper said:


> You don't know that lives could have been saved. (b) You don't know that the situation could have been worse. I took the advice of our Covid-19 Advisors on the situation and I have no regrets.



Well we are being asked to wear them now so I guess that the thinking is that masks help prevent the spread of this disease. If it helps prevent the spread now then it would have helped back in March/April/May. I definitely think the situation would have been "better" if we had all worn masks from the outset.


----------



## SlurrySlump

mathepac said:


> Dunnes stores Rathdowney Co Laois this afternoon, no staff member wearing masks, not one single uniformed person whether behind plastic shields or in free circulation re-stocking shelves or standing around in groups of three or four chatting and blocking aisles wore masks; most of the customers not bothered with either masks or hand-sanitisation.



I called in to a small Centra store yesterday. There was a steady stream of customers coming in to pick up small purchases. In the door, grab a couple of items and then out again. I wore my mask but 90% of others didn't. What can an owner of a small shop do in these circumstances?

I have contacted Dunnes a couple of times about a similar experience that mathepac had. I just got a copy and paste reply. I will feel a lot better when the rules are enforced and everyone including staff wear masks. Name and shame the stores on their Facebook page and it will soon have them following the rules.


----------



## joer

I really do not know what the big deal in wearing a mask is anyway. Safety should always be the most important reason for doing anything.


----------



## odyssey06

IsleOfMan said:


> Well we are being asked to wear them now so I guess that the thinking is that masks help prevent the spread of this disease. If it helps prevent the spread now then it would have helped back in March/April/May. I definitely think the situation would have been "better" if we had all worn masks from the outset.



You are right. But in Ireland at the time there was a lot of confusion and misinformation coming out about masks. Some of it was because our authorities believed the Chinese authorities who lied and tried to pretend that human to human transmission was rare, and that surface transmission was the primary means of infection. Some of it was because our authorities did not want people panic buying masks as they did not have enough supplies for hospitals etc.
They spread this scare scenario of oh you will get infected if you don't wear and take off the mask 100% right and otherwise you would be ok.
That can happen, but compared to the risk of breathing in droplets in the air given this is a respiratory virus?
There are complaints from nurses unions that it took the HSE far too long to adopt a policy of general mask usage in healthcare settings and this was one of the reasons why our healthcare worker infection rate is so high.
So Ireland was behind the curve on masks and you still see some of the 'experts' who are stuck on that wrong advice from March and won't let it go.


----------



## joer

And there is still confusion about a lot of issues out there.


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> There are complaints from nurses unions that it took the HSE far too long to adopt a policy of general mask usage in healthcare settings and this was one of the reasons why our healthcare worker infection rate is so high.


See I just don't get that. If these are the highly skilled healthcare professionals that they tell us that we are so lucky to have then why do they need to be told they have to wear masks? Would they not just wear them anyway?


----------



## odyssey06

Purple said:


> See I just don't get that. If these are the highly skilled healthcare professionals that they tell us that we are so lucky to have then why do they need to be told they have to wear masks? Would they not just wear them anyway?



Apparently it was HSE policy not to wear them except in specific settings and disciplinary procedures were even threatened against some staff for doing do when on general duties.
My opinions on our 'experts' who all too readily believed what was coming from China is noted above.


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> Apparently it was HSE policy not to wear them except in specific settings and disciplinary procedures were even threatened against some staff for doing do when on general duties.


I heard that claim but haven't seen any evidence to back it up. It's not as if nurses and healthcare employees medical professionals don't all have militant Unions. Are the claiming they were afraid to speak up?


----------



## Sophrosyne

This article from the Journal.ie dated April 2 shows the thinking at that time.

“At the HSE’s press briefing on Tuesday of this week, Dr Cillian De Gascun, chair of the HSE’s Coronavirus Expert Advisory Group, acknowledged the anxiety among healthcare workers and said that it’s something they will keep under review. He cited a lack of evidence as to the reason that they don’t recommend the use of masks with asymptomatic patients. Dr Colm Henry, the HSE’s Chief Clinical Officer added, “the use of masks in asymptomatic settings adds little benefit and may increase risk because of the increased movement of hands towards the face”.

 And well done to the journalist, Deirdre Mullins and also Professor Crown.


----------



## odyssey06

Purple said:


> I heard that claim but haven't seen any evidence to back it up. It's not as if nurses and healthcare employees medical professionals don't all have militant Unions. Are the claiming they were afraid to speak up?



I don't have evidence as such, but The Journal covered what was presented to the Oireachtas Committee :
She described meetings with the HSE where *the INMO had to “lobby and cajole” the decision-makers into making it mandatory* for face masks to be worn by all healthcare workers on duty. One nurse was sent home for wearing a face mask during their shift, Ní Sheaghdha said, stating that the worker was told that it was not HSE policy. The matter became an industrial issue which has since been resolved, the committee was told









						'An absolute scandal': Ireland has the highest Covid infection rate for healthcare workers in the world, committee told
					

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar this evening suggested that the figures provided by the INMO were wrong.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## Leo

IsleOfMan said:


> As Ireland had no "smog" why do you think that these people were wearing masks?



In fairness, Dublin and other urban areas regularly exceed WHO safe limits on airborne pollutants. ~1,200 premature deaths pa are attributed to air pollution here .


----------



## Purple

Leo said:


> In fairness, Dublin and other urban areas regularly exceed WHO safe limits on airborne pollutants. ~1,200 premature deaths pa are attributed to air pollution here .


And more than 3 million globally.


----------



## Mouldy

IsleOfMan said:


> My son lived in Beijing for 3 years so I know all about the poor air quality there. He now lives in Hong Kong but has visited many Chinese cities. Yes, the air quality was poor but that is not the only reason why people wore masks. One of the reasons they wore masks was out of consideration to others. As you said "You'd even notice many Asian people in Ireland wearing face masks back then too". As Ireland had no "smog" why do you think that these people were wearing masks?
> 
> I have been wearing a mask in supermarkets since early March. These were available online, there were also builder's type masks available in Woodies, Brooks and other similar shops.
> 
> 
> 
> Leper, I see that you gave a thumbs up to this post. If you support this statement then I am surprised that you were not one of the first people to wear a mask back in early March. Your comment "I won't be wearing a face mask or plastic gloves mainly because (i) they are almost ineffective" seems to suggest that you are going to stick with the "smog" theory on the one hand but accept that they were also worn because of the SARS outbreak.
> 
> 
> 
> Well we are being asked to wear them now so I guess that the thinking is that masks help prevent the spread of this disease. If it helps prevent the spread now then it would have helped back in March/April/May. I definitely think the situation would have been "better" if we had all worn masks from the outset.



I wear a mask (only started recently), and I hope others do to, where required to do so. I see a lot of people evangelising masks not so much for the public health benefits but to hear themselves telling other people what to do and then judging them publically when they don't.

Wear a mask, then mind your own business.


----------



## odyssey06

Mouldy said:


> I wear a mask (only started recently), and I hope others do to, where required to do so. I see a lot of people evangelising masks not so much for the public health benefits but to hear themselves telling other people what to do and then judging them publically when they don't.
> Wear a mask, then mind your own business.



I see testimonials online from children and adults with asthma, with the line "If I can wear a mask you can too"
Sometimes they are minding their own business when they evangelise masks, because what others breathe out is their business too.


----------



## mathepac

Mouldy said:


> Wear a mask, then mind your own business.


I have family-members who are in the vulnerable category. Their safety and well-being is my business.


----------



## Ceist Beag

Most customers in Dunnes wore masks this morning, still a few though not wearing any. A large number of staff members were still not wearing any. One was even ranting to a customer about how "this propaganda sh*te is taking over"!   
In our local Supervalu staff members are politely asking customers to wear a mask the next time if they haven't one on. I do think Dunnes need to get their staff in line with the message from government. I can appreciate the masks around the mouth can be difficult to wear for hours on end but plenty of their colleagues were wearing the screen type masks which I don't think anyone could really object to wearing.


----------



## mathepac

Mr Price Rathdowney Co Laois yesterday, shop was quiet enough, all the staff wearing masks, hand-cleanser available inside the main entrance, shopping baskets cleaned behind the check-out area before being stacked and returned for customer use. The check-out area is well shielded with clear plastic "walls" and the floors have clear safety markings. A well run retail outlet, apart from three female customers, wandering the aisles randomly, three-abreast, none of them wearing masks, none of them carrying shopping baskets.

When I encountered them for the third time approaching me head-on, I asked the oldest member of the group if she had a mask she could wear.  She immediately launched into a loud tirade about my abusing her.  Three staff members were on the spot immediately when she repeated the accusation of abuse. I pointed out to her that all I'd done was ask her if she had a mask she could wear, in line with health guidelines for retail outlets.  She agreed I'd asked her about the mask, adding now that as she had breathing difficulties she was exempt from wearing one. I asked if her companions also suffered breathing difficulties and were also exempt and pointed out that the sensible thing to do, as a member of a vulnerable community, was to stay home.

The woman who seemed to be the senior staff-member thanked me for my contribution and said she'd handle the matter from there. I thanked her and moved on, reversing my route out of the aisle now blocked by six people.

For years I understood that the right to service in a shop was reserved to the proprietor/staff, in other words they decide what customers to serve. In the absence from any legislation from government, isn't it a simple matter for retail outlets to ask shoppers not wearing masks to leave until suitable attired? Conversely, can shoppers complain about the shop's failure to protect them adequately?


----------



## Kimmagegirl

Lidl Stillorgan today about 80% of customers wearing masks. Most staff wearing masks but only over their mouths, not nose.

Sign on door asking people to wear masks. It appears that this only applies to some people.

Is it mandatory to wear masks in supermarkets?


----------



## Leo

Kimmagegirl said:


> Is it mandatory to wear masks in supermarkets?



It's advised, not mandatory at this point.


----------



## Purple

Kimmagegirl said:


> Is it mandatory to wear masks in supermarkets?


I think the advice is to wear them but the regulation hasn't been drafted yet. You'd be forgiven for asking why such regulation wasn't drafted weeks ago in anticipation of this eventuality by the brilliant people we are so lucky to have employed as public servants in the various departments.


----------



## Mouldy

mathepac said:


> Mr Price Rathdowney Co Laois yesterday, shop was quiet enough, all the staff wearing masks, hand-cleanser available inside the main entrance, shopping baskets cleaned behind the check-out area before being stacked and returned for customer use. The check-out area is well shielded with clear plastic "walls" and the floors have clear safety markings. A well run retail outlet, apart from three female customers, wandering the aisles randomly, three-abreast, none of them wearing masks, none of them carrying shopping baskets.
> 
> When I encountered them for the third time approaching me head-on, I asked the oldest member of the group if she had a mask she could wear.  She immediately launched into a loud tirade about my abusing her.  Three staff members were on the spot immediately when she repeated the accusation of abuse. I pointed out to her that all I'd done was ask her if she had a mask she could wear, in line with health guidelines for retail outlets.  She agreed I'd asked her about the mask, adding now that as she had breathing difficulties she was exempt from wearing one. I asked if her companions also suffered breathing difficulties and were also exempt and pointed out that the sensible thing to do, as a member of a vulnerable community, was to stay home.
> 
> The woman who seemed to be the senior staff-member thanked me for my contribution and said she'd handle the matter from there. I thanked her and moved on, reversing my route out of the aisle now blocked by six people.
> 
> For years I understood that the right to service in a shop was reserved to the proprietor/staff, in other words they decide what customers to serve. In the absence from any legislation from government, isn't it a simple matter for retail outlets to ask shoppers not wearing masks to leave until suitable attired? Conversely, can shoppers complain about the shop's failure to protect them adequately?



I was in a supermarket a couple of weeks ago, big place, well known name. I was walking by the hot deli counter and one of the staff was taking trays of hot chips, chicken etc. from a trolley and placing them in the hot trays.

While he was doing this, an acquaintance (non staff) was chatting to him while helping himself to handfuls of chips, shoving them into his mouth and going back for more with the same hand. The staff member didn’t give a toss. Other staff members could also see them, none of them did anything.

If I had met a manager in the aisle whilst doing my shop, I might have mentioned it. I didn’t even dream of confronting the double dipper because nothing would have come from it other than my making two new “friends” in my village.

Regardless of our own outrage, there is very little to be gained by making ourselves police, judge and jury to strangers in supermarkets. Framing the event as a crime against ourselves only serves to deepen our own sense of frustration while achieving nothing other than possibly putting our own safety in danger (people have been killed for less).

On top of this and probably most important of all, _we don’t have the right to harass other other people whose behaviour annoys us if that behaviour is legal and not harming anyone at the time. We can choose to take our business elsewhere._

You'll end up giving yourself a heart attack over this stuff.

Finally in my case, none of the parties involved were wearing masks that day and so going by the levels of hysteria abundant on social media, I can only assume that they're all dead now.


----------



## mathepac

You observed possible acts theft and breaches of food handling regulations and basic hygiene in the shop and did nothing? I'm not sure I'd want to keep quiet so I could remain on good terms with the perpetrators. I'm rather more choosy about people I'd want as acquaintances.

I don't abide by the old Irish principle of ignoring selfish, uncaring behaviour or wrongdoing ("ah shure, there's people doing worse") especially where health and lives may be at risk.


----------



## odyssey06

Mouldy said:


> I was in a supermarket a couple of weeks ago, big place, well known name. I was walking by the hot deli counter and one of the staff was taking trays of hot chips, chicken etc. from a trolley and placing them in the hot trays.
> While he was doing this, an acquaintance (non staff) was chatting to him while helping himself to handfuls of chips, shoving them into his mouth and going back for more with the same hand. The staff member didn’t give a toss. Other staff members could also see them, none of them did anything.
> If I had met a manager in the aisle whilst doing my shop, I might have mentioned it. I didn’t even dream of confronting the double dipper because nothing would have come from it other than my making two new “friends” in my village.
> Regardless of our own outrage, there is very little to be gained by making ourselves police, judge and jury to strangers in supermarkets. Framing the event as a crime against ourselves only serves to deepen our own sense of frustration while achieving nothing other than possibly putting our own safety in danger (people have been killed for less).
> On top of this and probably most important of all, _we don’t have the right to harass other other people whose behaviour annoys us if that behaviour is legal and not harming anyone at the time. We can choose to take our business elsewhere._
> You'll end up giving yourself a heart attack over this stuff.
> Finally in my case, none of the parties involved were wearing masks that day and so going by the levels of hysteria abundant on social media, I can only assume that they're all dead now.



Their behaviour there wasn't legal regardless of covid-19 and should be reporting to the Food Safety Authority of Ireland.
Calling out egregious breaches of safety legislation isn't harassment and there are numerous ways in which their behaviour could harm others.
If I were you at the very least I would never purchase hot food from said establishment and tell your anecdote to everyone in your vicinity so they can take similar precautions.

Social media hysteria? People dropping dead? Seems like a case of pot - kettle- black.


----------



## Mouldy

odyssey06 said:


> Their behaviour there wasn't legal regardless of covid-19 and should be reporting to the Food Safety Authority of Ireland.



I'm not an expert on food safety legislation and so was not able to make a citizens arrest on the spot. If I was wrong about my legal opinion, I'm harassing the person, who by the way, is eating with the consent of a staff member and in front of other staff members. And other customers.
Even if I'm right about my legal opinion, the correct course of action is to alert the manager. On the day, I didn't care to do this as it would have descended into "I said/ they said".



> Calling out egregious breaches of safety legislation isn't harassment and there are numerous ways in which their behaviour could harm others.
> If I were you at the very least I would never purchase hot food from said establishment and tell your anecdote to everyone in your vicinity so they can take similar precautions.


Please don't act like this doesn't happen all the time, everywhere. I'd lick door handles before I'd eat hot deli food. FWIW I've told plenty of people.


> Social media hysteria? People dropping dead? Seems like a case of pot - kettle- black.


That was a half joke, based on the current levels of catastrophisation on Twitter regarding masks. Thanks for the feedback, I'll drop it from my open mic routine.


----------



## Mouldy

mathepac said:


> You observed possible acts theft and breaches of food handling regulations and basic hygiene in the shop and did nothing? I'm not sure I'd want to keep quiet so I could remain on good terms with the perpetrators. I'm rather more choosy about people I'd want as acquaintances.
> 
> I don't abide by the old Irish principle of ignoring selfish, uncaring behaviour or wrongdoing ("ah shure, there's people doing worse") especially where health and lives may be at risk.



One of the points I was trying to make was that for all your heroic interventions, you're having no effect. Those people didn't care what you thought. It's unlikely the management cared either. Nobody was breaking the law and nobody was answerable to you in that moment. 

I offered my story to show that its not just masks, there is loads of outrageous behavior right in front of our noses every day. It seems that now masks will be the flashpoint for this needless, judgy, totally ineffective behavior going forward. Good luck with that if that's the kind of thing that makes you feel happy.


----------



## odyssey06

Mouldy said:


> I'm not an expert on food safety legislation and so was not able to make a citizens arrest on the spot. If I was wrong about my legal opinion, I'm harassing the person, who by the way, is eating with the consent of a staff member and in front of other staff members. And other customers.
> Even if I'm right about my legal opinion, the correct course of action is to alert the manager. On the day, I didn't care to do this as it would have descended into "I said/ they said".
> Please don't act like this doesn't happen all the time, everywhere. I'd lick door handles before I'd eat hot deli food. FWIW I've told plenty of people.
> That was a half joke, based on the current levels of catastrophisation on Twitter regarding masks. Thanks for the feedback, I'll drop it from my open mic routine.



You're not an expert on food safety legislation? Citizens arrest? Who said anything of the sort?
You don't have to be an expert or conduct a house arrest - just to report obvious breaches of hygiene in establishments that prepare food to the FSA.

Catastrophisation? 1300+ people have died. That was a catastrophe.
Masks are a low impact (in terms of costs) piece of a set of measures to help reduce the R factor for this virus so we can reduce the future cases count and future death count. I don't want to see the country stepping back in phases and back to lockdowns. If we don't get serious about them and the other measures we'll only have ourselves to blame for such an eventuality. Whataboutery about kitchen deli counters is neither here not there.


----------



## Mouldy

odyssey06 said:


> Catastrophisation? 1300+ people have died. That was a catastrophe.
> Masks are a low impact (in terms of costs) piece of a set of measures to help reduce the R factor for this virus so we can reduce the future cases count and future death count. I don't want to see the country stepping back in phases and back to lockdowns. If we don't get serious about them and the other measures we'll only have ourselves to blame for such an eventuality. Whataboutery about kitchen deli counters is neither here not there.



I think the number is 1700+. If you're saying all of those people died because other people didn't wear masks, then that's catastrophisation and that's  the narrative being generated on social media now. Another narrative, along the same vein, is that COVID = 100% chance of death. Also catastrophisation. 

As I said before, I wear a mask and I hope others do too. Put your mask on, where required, then mind your own business.


----------



## odyssey06

Mouldy said:


> I think the number is 1700+. If you're saying all of those people died because other people didn't wear masks, then that's catastrophisation and that's  the narrative being generated on social media now. Another narrative, along the same vein, is that COVID = 100% chance of death. Also catastrophisation.
> As I said before, I wear a mask and I hope others do too. Put your mask on, where required, then mind your own business.



Please point out where exactly I said that all those people died because other people didn't wear masks?

I'm implying masks can play a part in averting a second catastrophe- both in terms of fatalities and economic impact.
I think the emerging evidence on masks does suggest we could have averted many deaths, especially in health and care settings, but also in the community, if we had had mandatory masks from March. 

Good that you are on board re: the wearing of masks.
But I disagree with the "minding your own business" - what droplets other people produce is everybody's business in the context of covid-19 or for that matter, what people drink re: drink driving or smoking in public spaces. Social disapproval has a part to play in establishing norms of behaviour as much as laws do.


----------



## Mouldy

> what droplets other people produce is everybody's business in the context of covid-19



I would _love _to see that assertion being tested in a court against Article 40.4, not to mention your fundamental right to privacy under the constitution. Utter nonsense. 



> Social disapproval has a part to play in establishing norms of behaviour as much as laws do.


Catholic Ireland used just that tactic to enable, hide and defend a litany of human rights abuses. This is not a virtue anyone should be encouraging.


----------



## odyssey06

Mouldy said:


> I would _love _to see that assertion being tested in a court against Article 40.4, not to mention your fundamental right to privacy under the constitution. Utter nonsense.
> Catholic Ireland used just that tactic to enable, hide and defend a litany of human rights abuses. This is not a virtue anyone should be encouraging.



The right to privacy has nothing to do with drink driving, smoking in public places, wearing masks in public places. They are everybodys business which is why there is government legislation concerning them.
When it comes to public health campaigns what another person drinks smokes or sneezes is everyones business as it can impact them as innocents.

Nor has the constitution anything to do with social disapproval of same or the establishment of societal norms.

I have no idea what you are on about re Catholic Church. Sounds like by your own logic you are breaching their right to privacy.


----------



## Mouldy

You said that the droplets other people produce was everyone's business. That's what I was replying to you're well aware of that. The other stuff you mention is irrelevant. 

If you're unaware of the history of the Catholic Church in Ireland I can only suggest that you read up on it. Social disapproval is a standard tool deployed by any establishment seeking control of otherwise unwilling  citizens in situations where the said authority lacks the legal clout or justification to implement legislation. It's generally premised on some "moral social responsibility " and engages the blind loyalty of  "useful idiots" to propagate the message. Non conformists or people who ask too many questions are socially ostracised. 

Most (bad) historic events were achieved in this way.


----------



## odyssey06

Mouldy said:


> You said that the droplets other people produce was everyone's business. That's what I was replying to you're well aware of that. The other stuff you mention is irrelevant.
> If you're unaware of the history of the Catholic Church in Ireland I can only suggest that you read up on it. Social disapproval is a standard tool deployed by any establishment seeking control of otherwise unwilling  citizens in situations where the said authority lacks the legal clout or justification to implement legislation. It's generally premised on some "moral social responsibility " and engages the blind loyalty of  "useful idiots" to propagate the message. Non conformists or people who ask too many questions are socially ostracised.
> Most (bad) historic events were achieved in this way.



The push towards social disapproval of such actions as - spitting in public, drink driving, smoking in public places had nothing to do with the process you have described though. Laws alone would not be enough without them also being denormalised socially.
And the 'tool' as you have described has I think no relevance to the issue of the mandatory wearing of masks and face coverings in public places during a public health emergency. Mask wearing to me fits with those previous changes in societal norms which had a public health aspect rather than anything from the bad old days of the Catholic Church as a state within a state.

It is everybody's business in the same sense as concern re: drink driving or smoking is - which is why the government is legislating for it and why it is the subject of a public health campaign. In this case we also need to socially normalise the wearing of masks and stigmatise those who take a cavalier attitude to them.


----------



## odyssey06

Where we need to get to is less of:
Tom what are you wearing a mask for... you look like a clown.

And more of:
Tom, if you are going to wear a mask at least wear it properly not like a pirate. Even Trump can wear one properly.


----------



## Mouldy

odyssey06 said:


> we also need to socially normalise the wearing of masks and stigmatise those who take a cavalier attitude to them.


And there it is.


----------



## Sophrosyne

Mouldy said:


> If you're unaware of the history of the Catholic Church in Ireland I can only suggest that you read up on it. Social disapproval is a standard tool deployed by any establishment seeking control of otherwise unwilling citizens in situations where the said authority lacks the legal clout or justification to implement legislation. It's generally premised on some "moral social responsibility " and engages the blind loyalty of "useful idiots" to propagate the message. Non conformists or people who ask too many questions are socially ostracised.



Just to get some perspective on this …

I’m cocooning since day one because I am 68 and have one underlying condition.

This condition doesn’t bother me at all in normal circumstances, but I have been advised that contracting SARS-CoV-2 would in all likelihood make me very sick at least or end my life at most.

Because it is exceptionally contagious, I can’t go to *any* indoor spaces – supermarkets, stores, restaurants, hotels, sports venues, etc., because of the chance of non-compliance with health advice on the part of the business or its customers.

I can patronize businesses only through their online services, if they have one, or by relying on others to buy something for me.

But, of course, this is not possible in every situation as specific businesses require physical presence of customers. Also I am disinclined to rely on others in case I endanger them.

Therefore, my support of Irish businesses has become confined and restricted.

Multiply my situation by thousands of others - people of my age and older, some younger and some much younger with considerably more serious underlying conditions than mine.

This has a direct effect on the economy.

People who, formerly, could work and/or like myself, make a greater contribution to the economy, are effectively deactivated by concerns of defiance of health advice.


----------



## odyssey06

Q: What’s the point of wearing a cloth face covering if it doesn’t filter out everything?
A: Cloth face masks still provide a major protective benefit: They filter out a majority of viral particles. Breathing in a small amount of virus *may lead to no disease or a more mild infection*. But inhaling a huge volume of virus particles can result in serious disease or death.








						Wearing masks could help you avoid major illness even if you get coronavirus, experts say
					

Skeptics say: Why wear masks if they don't filter out all coronavirus? Scientists say: Because it could mean less severe illness.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## mathepac

And there it is. Any reasonable, sensible measure that helps protect me and others, whether legislation or recommendation, needs to be embraced to try to avoid the dreaded secondary pandemic wave being seen in other countries. I fail to see the problem with doing the simple things.

The shopping in herds thing is becoming common-place again. How many young wans does it take to shop for a multi-pack of Taytos, sans masks, ignoring handwashing on leaving the shop and social distancing? The minimum seems to be four.


----------



## Purple

Mouldy said:


> And there it is.


And there what is?


----------



## Purple

mathepac said:


> The shopping in herds thing is becoming common-place again. How many young wans does it take to shop for a multi-pack of Taytos, sans masks, ignoring handwashing on leaving the shop and social distancing? The minimum seems to be four.


I agree with that but until shops require their own floor staff to wear masks they will find it difficult to enforce the rules on their customers.


----------



## Leper

mathepac said:


> Apart from PPE, is there any chance Blessed Martin could appoint a Minister for Sensible Heads, as they seem to be in short supply. Dunnes stores Rathdowney Co Laois this afternoon, no staff member wearing masks, not one single uniformed person whether behind plastic shields or in free circulation re-stocking shelves or standing around in groups of three or four chatting and blocking aisles wore masks; most of the customers not bothered with either masks or hand-sanitisation.  I asked a staff member standing inside the exit/entrance what the story was and he launched into a story about his asthma and masks and awaiting legal guidance from those above.  God help us.
> 
> In contrast, in SuperValu a few hundred metres away, all staff members and most customers wore masks and gloves and the store has been redesigned with the old entrance now one-way and a new one-way exit.  Well done SuperValu.
> 
> I know I'm a late convert, but anything we can do to try to avoid another pandemic surge is worth doing, unless you work or shop in Dunnes.


We mainly use Dunnes Stores in Cork's Douglas Court for food etc. As far as I am concerned since the start of the pandemic in Ireland Dunnes Stores are light years ahead of most other supermarkets/textile-outlets. There is plenty of space within the aisles. The staff are the friendliest and most helpful I've come across. They all wear face masks. Pity I can't say the same about some of the customers.


----------



## Leo

Leper said:


> As far as I am concerned since the start of the pandemic in Ireland Dunnes Stores are light years ahead of most other supermarkets/textile-outlets.



From reports here it sounds like there is a broad variation in how different stores are being managed.


----------



## joer

I was in Dunnes stores off O Connell St last week and all staff and 90 per cent of customers were wearing masks. And most other stores all staff and about 80 per cent which is a big improvement on when I was there about three weeks ago.


----------



## mathepac

joer said:


> I was in Dunnes stores off O Connell St


Limerick or Ennis?


----------



## joer

Dublin actually, sorry about that.


----------



## Grizzly

Are they mandatory in shops yet?  I thought that this was going to become law? What's the delay?

I was in Blackrock yesterday, visited the Frascati Shopping Centre. Most people were wearing masks but you had the 10% that just wouldn't wear them. They need to be stopped at the door by someone and told that they have to wear a mask or no entry.


----------



## Leo

Grizzly said:


> Are they mandatory in shops yet? I thought that this was going to become law? What's the delay?



Legislation only passes quickly when it's dealing with non-contentious issues like pay rises for politicians. Everything else, they all want their say through series of debates and reviews.


----------



## odyssey06

Leo said:


> Legislation only passes quickly when it's dealing with non-contentious issues like pay rises for politicians. Everything else, they all want their say through series of debates and reviews.



Isn't the Dail about to go on holidays for 6 weeks? So if it's not passed soon seems DOA.


----------



## Leo

odyssey06 said:


> Isn't the Dail about to go on holidays for 6 weeks? So if it's not passed soon seems DOA.



Yep, and I see no recent action on the topic.


----------



## horse7

Grizzly said:


> Are they mandatory in shops yet?  I thought that this was going to become law? What's the delay?
> 
> I was in Blackrock yesterday, visited the Frascati Shopping Centre. Most people were wearing masks but you had the 10% that just wouldn't wear them. They need to be stopped at the door by someone and told that they have to wear a mask or no entry.


It's the same in Blanchardstown center. I think there should be a sign on the shop window,no face covering no service. The same for banks, EBS etc.


----------



## mathepac

Purple said:


> I agree with that but until shops require their own floor staff to wear masks they will find it difficult to enforce the rules on their customers.


The shopkeepers haven't the slightest intention of enforcing any rules that might endanger sales. Today in a local CENTRA shop I asked a bunch of young lads  in hurling gear why they weren't

wearing masks
observing the 2 mtr social distancing guidance
cleaning their hands entering or leaving the shop.

I got the usual guff in response from the young gurriers, but amazingly, the shop assistant took it upon herself to interject and I quote, "the guidelines are mandatory but not a legal requirement yet".  With that kind of nonsense coming from a responsible adult, what hope the young dudes will honour the guidelines?

CENTRA, Main st, Urlingford, Co Kilkenny now off the shopping list and as the young lads self-identified as being from Kilkenny CBS,  I'll check with the principal's office as soon as that's possible.


----------



## mathepac

Face coverings to be mandatory in retail settings from Monday, 10th August https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0804/1157298-live-tracker-gov-phase-four/

Posted on RTE website at 22:00 hrs 4th August, no further elaboration as of 01:12 Weds 5th August.

How will this be enforced or perhaps my question should be will this be enforced? Shoppers are ignoring the guidelines the government published, any bets they'll ignore what is now mandatory?


----------



## RichInSpirit

I thought that face masks were mandatory from 2 or 3 weeks ago.


----------



## odyssey06

RichInSpirit said:


> I thought that face masks were mandatory from 2 or 3 weeks ago.



Mandatory but not compulsory yet ... waiting to see if by 10th august they will be legislation or workplace safety rules to back this up or does it remain a 'guideline'.


----------



## Mackem

Visited our local Tesco (Navan) this morning. I encountered approx. 15 staff in the aisles of which only 1 was wearing face covering - a face shield. In the checkout area the lady supervising the self service checkouts plus two other staff in the area were also wearing face shields while the lady at my checkout was wearing a face mask even though she was also protected by a perspex screen. All bar 3 of the customers I saw (I estimate at least 40) were wearing masks. Why do these floor staff feel they don’t need to wear face coverings either to protect themselves or the customers ?. I know I will be accused of being ageist here but I would say all of them were under 30. Btw in our local SuperValu (Johnstown) all staff (except perspex protected checkout staff) seem to be wearing face masks. The sooner it is made mandatory the better.


----------



## Sunny

All very well talking about masks in shops but we are seeing large clusters in environments like food processing factories and construction. Why aren't we seeing moves to make face coverings compulsory there? Or are they compulsory and still not preventing the spread. We seem to be spending so much energy debating areas like travel and masks in shops that we seem to lose sight of where the actual transmissions are. Direct Provision facilities and Food Processing all saw outbreaks in other countries and they are linked so it shouldn't have come as a shock. Now we have them expressing concern at the outbreak and teams are being put in place. Same with the Roma and Traveller communities. These were high risk from day one. We recently had a visit from a convoy of Travellers with English reg vehicles into our small town. The matter was raised with local politicians and they all ran a mile from the issue. Easier to condemn a flight from the US I suppose......


----------



## odyssey06

Sunny said:


> All very well talking about masks in shops but we are seeing large clusters in environments like food processing factories and construction. Why aren't we seeing moves to make face coverings compulsory there? Or are they compulsory and still not preventing the spread. We seem to be spending so much energy debating areas like travel and masks in shops that we seem to lose sight of where the actual transmissions are.



The Cabinet briefing discussed many things e.g. pubs, green list.
NPHET mentioned in their briefing concern about transmission between colleagues sharing lifts to work.
So there's nothing to suggest masks are 'drowning' out any other issue. I see zero evidence for that idea.
It gets a lot of discussion on social media forums because it affects ordinary citizens rather than just people in specific workplace settings.









						New clusters in meat plants, direct provision centres and among Traveller community
					

There is also concern about a shift in the location of cases away from the greater Dublin region.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## gianni

mathepac said:


> The shopkeepers haven't the slightest intention of enforcing any rules that might endanger sales. Today in a local CENTRA shop I asked a bunch of young lads  in hurling gear why they weren't
> 
> wearing masks
> observing the 2 mtr social distancing guidance
> cleaning their hands entering or leaving the shop.
> 
> I got the usual guff in response from the young gurriers, but amazingly, the shop assistant took it upon herself to interject and I quote, "the guidelines are mandatory but not a legal requirement yet".  With that kind of nonsense coming from a responsible adult, what hope the young dudes will honour the guidelines?
> 
> CENTRA, Main st, Urlingford, Co Kilkenny now off the shopping list and as the young lads self-identified as being from Kilkenny CBS,  I'll check with the principal's office as soon as that's possible.



Was the Centra worker not correct, though?


----------



## jackswift

mathepac said:


> The shopkeepers haven't the slightest intention of enforcing any rules that might endanger sales. Today in a local CENTRA shop I asked a bunch of young lads  in hurling gear why they weren't
> 
> wearing masks
> observing the 2 mtr social distancing guidance
> cleaning their hands entering or leaving the shop.
> 
> I got the usual guff in response from the young gurriers, but amazingly, the shop assistant took it upon herself to interject and I quote, "the guidelines are mandatory but not a legal requirement yet".  With that kind of nonsense coming from a responsible adult, what hope the young dudes will honour the guidelines?
> 
> CENTRA, Main st, Urlingford, Co Kilkenny now off the shopping list and as the young lads self-identified as being from Kilkenny CBS,  I'll check with the principal's office as soon as that's possible.


It’s a wonder that you didn’t perform a citizens arrest.


----------



## mathepac

I was about to produce a few karate chops but the butchery department was closed.


----------



## mathepac

gianni said:


> Was the Centra worker not correct, though?


I dunno, what'll be different on 10th August? The announcement today was full of mights, shoulds, coulds maybes and perhapses, pretty much as expected, a ball of smoke. Pennys in Galway is getting it right, telling people not wearing masks to come back when suitably attired in line with the guidelines. Well done, two staff members at the door helping to ensure the safety of Pennys customers.


----------



## odyssey06

Explainer from The Journal on the new legislation - not that while these premises may not be covered by the legislation, it is possible they will still insist on use of a face covering:


A few indoor places don’t fall under the requirement to wear coverings.
Post offices, credit unions and banks do not fall under the regulations. Indoor facilities that include any of these three services are also exempt from the requirement. 
Anywhere that sells food or drinks for the principal reason of being consumed on the premises, such as restaurants, is also excluded. 
Places that mainly provide medical, dental or a few other healthcare services do not have the requirement.









						Explainer: Everything to know about new face covering regulations
					

You have to wear a face covering in most shops from today.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## topcrickets

I think it is necessary to wear masks in public places. If everyone does not go to a store where the staff does not wear a mask, they will consciously wear a mask.


----------



## 24601

odyssey06 said:


> Explainer from The Journal on the new legislation - not that while these premises may not be covered by the legislation, it is possible they will still insist on use of a face covering:
> 
> Post offices, credit unions and banks do not fall under the regulations. Indoor facilities that include any of these three services are also exempt from the requirement



Does anyone know why these are exempt? Is it for security reasons or what?


----------



## odyssey06

24601 said:


> Does anyone know why these are exempt? Is it for security reasons or what?



I'm afraid I haven't read the definitive reason. That's a plausible reason. Also, it may be they are not defined in law as 'retail' and the wording specifically only applied to retail.


----------



## EmmDee

24601 said:


> Does anyone know why these are exempt? Is it for security reasons or what?



I assume because having people in masks walking into banks etc was seen as a security risk


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

EmmDee said:


> I assume because having people in masks walking into banks etc was seen as a security risk


That would make sense if it was mandatory not to wear a mask.


----------



## EmmDee

Duke of Marmalade said:


> That would make sense if it was mandatory not to wear a mask.



Give it a go. Let us know what happens.


----------



## Purple

Interesting report that Covid19 can in fact be airborne, aerosolized up to 5 metres from infected patients in hospitals.  
It makes massk wearing all the more important.


----------



## Saavy99

24601 said:


> Does anyone know why these are exempt? Is it for security reasons or what?


Maybe it's because banks. Post offices etc have glass screens in place to protect staff.


----------



## Saavy99

odyssey06 said:


> If their asthma is that bad they can't use a cloth face covering, they shouldn't be working in a public setting in an outbreak of a severe respiratory virus.
> 
> _"If a patient’s asthma is so severe that a standard cloth mask prevents them from breathing properly — which she says only includes about 1 percent of asthma patients — then they should be staying home anyway since the risk of them developing severe COVID-19 symptoms may be higher. "
> - Sally Wenzel, the director of the University of Pittsburgh Asthma Institute at UPMC _



If they have a respiratory condition all the more reason they should be wearing masks.


----------



## odyssey06

Just noting that France have mandated masks in all workplaces from 1st September due to concerns about aerosol transmission:








						France mandating masks at all workplaces as virus reawakens
					

Rolling coverage of the international stories of interest to our readers




					www.irishexaminer.com


----------



## Susie2017

Has anyone considered the evidence/ scientific publications about the efficacy of masks as a preventative measure in the general public setting ?


----------



## odyssey06

Susie2017 said:


> Has anyone considered the evidence/ scientific publications about the efficacy of masks as a preventative measure in the general public setting ?



There's a pretty good distillation here on why the US CDC changed theiradvice on masks:








						Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus
					

We talked to UCSF epidemiologist George Rutherford, MD, and infectious disease specialist Peter Chin-Hong, MD, about the CDC’s reversal on mask-wearing, the current science on how masks work, and what to consider when choosing a mask.




					www.ucsf.edu


----------



## Susie2017

That's an article. Theres quite a long list of scientific peer reviewed trials in the actual medical literature i.e pub med that would say the opposite. Masks don't work. Just because WHO did a u turn doesn't make them work. They should be reserved for the hospital environment. To see them used and then littered all over town and country is another unwanted effect of bad government decision making. To see individual citizens turning on one another on here and in supermarkets over false science is also regrettable. I wont be wearing one and many people who do are wearing them entirely incorrectly. Therefore they are fooling themselves, wasting money and damaging the environment.


----------



## Leo

Susie2017 said:


> Masks don't work.



Can you point to a study that conclusively proves that masks are 0% effective?



Susie2017 said:


> They should be reserved for the hospital environment.



On what grounds?

Also, if 'masks don't work', why do they persist with using them in hospitals? Is it because they are so comfortable to wear all day?


----------



## Thirsty

Susie2017 said:


> ...see them used and then littered all over town and country..


agree this is disgraceful, as is all littering.

Reusable masks are easily purchased or sewn at home. 

How much difference does it make? Don't know, but it doesn't cost me anything to wear it; so even if the positive impact is tiny, I'm prepared to do it.

Does it bother me to wear one in a shop or where required? No.

We've a long way to go yet on this virus.


----------



## odyssey06

Susie2017 said:


> That's an article. Theres quite a long list of scientific peer reviewed trials in the actual medical literature i.e pub med that would say the opposite. Masks don't work. Just because WHO did a u turn doesn't make them work. They should be reserved for the hospital environment. To see them used and then littered all over town and country is another unwanted effect of bad government decision making. To see individual citizens turning on one another on here and in supermarkets over false science is also regrettable. I wont be wearing one and many people who do are wearing them entirely incorrectly. Therefore they are fooling themselves, wasting money and damaging the environment.



It's an article summarising the reasons why the CDC changed their guidance on wearing masks.
They are better placed than any of us to understand the actual medical literature.
The evidence they have cited is very persuasive to me, everything from trial studies of droplets produced, to the data from different countries, to actual case studies e.g. of infected hairdressers or airline passengers.
It is the same evidence that has persuaded authorities in US states and EU countries, and the European CDC, to roll them out in more and more settings.

If you look at the figures for cases in health and nursing home settings in this country, the numbers drop dramatically in late April after their HSE changed their guidance on masks.
So clearly masks are effective in hospital and care environments.
Masks do work are suppressing transmission of the virus by droplets.
This is not just wearing of masks by health staff as PPE but wearing of masks by suspected patients to reduce the viral load they produce.

"False science" is a pretty strong claim and to be honest nothing you have quoted in support so far in any way justifies it.

The litter angle is a red herring.
There's disused tissues on the street, does that mean governments shouldn't have advised people pre-mask to cough or sneeze into tissues?


----------



## Susie2017

They don't work because many peer reviewed publications have proven they don't work. I can provide a link to selected publications but it would be a very long post. I see people wearing them incorrectly everywhere I go. On their foreheads, under their noses, holding or touching them with their fingers, positioned under the chin etc. Many of them look like they are already filthy. It's quite disgusting in fact. The virus particles are so tiny they can easily pass through cloth masks and surgical masks even N95 masks. They were never designed for use in general public. The ones people are using are also of poor design quality and provide no seal. I'm amazed the number of people that have bought into this bunkum when there is such a long list of peer reviewed publications out there showing they don't work. Its akin to snake oil. It is irresponsible of decision makers to suggest this policy as it gives users a false sense of security. Not to mention expense and damage to the environment.


----------



## RedOnion

Susie2017 said:


> They don't work because many peer reviewed publications have proven they don't work.





Susie2017 said:


> there is such a long list of peer reviewed publications out there showing they don't work.


Can you post a link to just 1?


----------



## odyssey06

Susie2017 said:


> They don't work because many peer reviewed publications have proven they don't work. I can provide a link to selected publications but it would be a very long post. I see people wearing them incorrectly everywhere I go. On their foreheads, under their noses, holding or touching them with their fingers, positioned under the chin etc. Many of them look like they are already filthy. It's quite disgusting in fact. The virus particles are so tiny they can easily pass through cloth masks and surgical masks even N95 masks. They were never designed for use in general public. The ones people are using are also of poor design quality and provide no seal. I'm amazed the number of people that have bought into this bunkum when there is such a long list of peer reviewed publications out there showing they don't work. Its akin to snake oil. It is irresponsible of decision makers to suggest this policy as it gives users a false sense of security. Not to mention expense and damage to the environment.



The people that clueless about wearing masks are probably largely the same group clueless about sanitising hands, maintaining distancing, elements of basic hygiene. It doesn't invalidate the basis of the advice.

Did any of these peer reviewed publications assess the viral load from these tiny virus particles versus those from droplets?
The tiny virus particle argument is rebutted by the below linked article, which includes links to the referenced studies.
It's a red herring. Masks are not about suppressing 100% of the viral load and every virus particle but blocking the majority of the highly infectious droplets.
It's the droplets that travel furthest and hang longest in the air without dispersal.

_Other studies bear this out in more detail, demonstrating that wearing masks does three important things. _

_One, they reduce the total mass and volume of droplets put into the environment. _
_Two, they reduce the distance that droplets travel and make physical distancing a much more effective preventative measure. _
_And three, wearing a face mask always reduces the total droplet mass relative to not wearing a mask, due to a combination of mask filtration (especially of larger droplets) and droplet evaporation (which is more effective for smaller droplets)._









						Ask Ethan: What Is The Science Behind Wearing A Mask?
					

At a very simple level, it's nothing but physics. Here's why you should care.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Leo

Susie2017 said:


> they can easily pass through cloth masks and surgical masks even N95 masks.



Can you guess what the 95 in the N95 certification stands for?


----------



## Susie2017

That is an article based on one person's opinion. It is not evidence. Anecdote based on one person flying who may not have been in the infectious stage is not evidence. Show the evidence in a peer reviewed scientific publication that masks work in widespread use to reduce respiratory droplet spread of viral particles. People have bought into the government narrative on everything. Litter might be a red herring to you, to others who respect the environment it is very upsetting to see the country damaged by unproven policy.


----------



## Susie2017

Reducing particles doesn't work. You only need one tiny particle to pass through to transmit. These particles are highly infectious and just because you stop some of them doesn't mean you reduce numbers of infections. Mother nature will have her way. All this talk of zero covid is utter nonsense. If masks worked then why so many infections in health care workers ? On the bright side we have the hope of better treatments by Christmas.  But I wont be using any mask in the meantime to give me a false sense of security. Breathing in your own exhaled CO2 while out walking is also ill advised and unpleasant. It will reduce your oxygen levels. Buy a pulse oximeter and check it out. If you have COPD or ischaemic heart disease it could make you unwell. Using crap cheap masks is a waste of time. Wearing them doesn't work.


----------



## EmmDee

Susie2017 said:


> They don't work because many peer reviewed publications have proven they don't work. I can provide a link to selected publications but it would be a very long post. I see people wearing them incorrectly everywhere I go. On their foreheads, under their noses, holding or touching them with their fingers, positioned under the chin etc. Many of them look like they are already filthy. It's quite disgusting in fact. The virus particles are so tiny they can easily pass through cloth masks and surgical masks even N95 masks. They were never designed for use in general public. The ones people are using are also of poor design quality and provide no seal. I'm amazed the number of people that have bought into this bunkum when there is such a long list of peer reviewed publications out there showing they don't work. Its akin to snake oil. It is irresponsible of decision makers to suggest this policy as it gives users a false sense of security. Not to mention expense and damage to the environment.



Two separate issues here - the standards required to protect the wearer are quite high and do involve proper seals and ventilation.

The requirement for people to wear masks in public is not to protect the wearer - they are designed to reduce the risk of the wearer infecting others by reducing range of coughs, sneezes and breathing. And contrary to your post, if there is general usage there is a significant reduction in risk. It's not absolute but it reduces transmission by approx. 70% if I recall. The advice specifically is not to wear N95 masks or masks designed for medical use because those masks are designed to prevent incoming virus and expel breath. That's not what is being managed

How people wear it is a separate issue and yes, they should be covering nose and mouth


----------



## EmmDee

Susie2017 said:


> Breathing in your own exhaled CO2 while out walking is also ill advised and unpleasant. It will reduce your oxygen levels. Buy a pulse oximeter and check it out.



Ok - at this stage you are making stuff up. There is plenty of evidence and example out there demonstrating oximeter readings while wearing masks and they don't reduce your O2 levels - this is conspiracy stuff


----------



## odyssey06

Susie2017 said:


> That is an article based on one person's opinion. It is not evidence. Anecdote based on one person flying who may not have been in the infectious stage is not evidence. Show the evidence in a peer reviewed scientific publication that masks work in widespread use to reduce respiratory droplet spread of viral particles. People have bought into the government narrative on everything. Litter might be a red herring to you, to others who respect the environment it is very upsetting to see the country damaged by unproven policy.



I specifically stated when linking the article that the article included links to the evidential studies.
The article is a summation of multiple such evidential studies.
The previous one also included such links.

You have failed to even attempt to explain why countries which had general mask wearing such as Czech Republic and Japan have such low figures compared to those who do not.

You lost me at "the government narrative". This is not a government narrative. 
This is the advice of multiple independent health bodies which has been accepted by multiple independent government health authorities and cabinets.
There was a government narrative in this country and others on masks, and it was downplaying their benefits because the authorities did not have the quantity of masks and were trying to protect stocks for hospital settings.
There was also a narrative from China early in this year downplaying the risks of droplet transmission and trying to present covid-19 as primarily spread through surfaces and contacts.
The information coming out now has no  narrative to it, just that health authorities believe that masks can be effective in reducing transmisison.

Litter is a red herring to any argument against masks effectiveness, or tissues, or gloves.


----------



## Susie2017

Regretfully I cant stay on here all day. But if people google 'why masks don't work' they might find some of the peer reviewed detail on this. I can post links later but it would be a long post. Not sure if that would be permitted. I have had posts deleted before as I don't go along with the narrative on a lot of this covid protocol. Its OTT, not evidence based and merely creates fear and anxiety. I just hope people start to do their own research and ask why we are being asked to live this way and why the economy and businesses are being so badly damaged.


----------



## Sunny

Can't believe this stuff is still even being debated. They have messed around with the advice and science of this since the start but the consensus advice is now that wearing face coverings reduces the risk of spreading the disease. I was sceptical at how effective they would be and I am still concerned at how people handle and wear their masks in public settings (I have seen people put them down on table in Café) but at the end of the day, the public health advice is to wear a mask. Just wear it and do your best to wear it correctly. That is all each of us can do.  

Wearing masks is not damaging businesses. It is helping businesses open. And people who throw away masks are the same people who dump rubbish every day. Not exactly a counterargument to wearing face coverings to help fight a pandemic.


----------



## Sophrosyne

Susie2017 said:


> I can post links later but it would be a long post.



Post just one or two links. That should take a couple of minutes.


----------



## EmmDee

Susie2017 said:


> ... But if people google 'why masks don't work' ...



No danger of confirmation bias there...


----------



## odyssey06

Susie2017 said:


> Reducing particles doesn't work. You only need one tiny particle to pass through to transmit. These particles are highly infectious and just because you stop some of them doesn't mean you reduce numbers of infections. Mother nature will have her way. All this talk of zero covid is utter nonsense. If masks worked then why so many infections in health care workers ? On the bright side we have the hope of better treatments by Christmas.  But I wont be using any mask in the meantime to give me a false sense of security. Breathing in your own exhaled CO2 while out walking is also ill advised and unpleasant. It will reduce your oxygen levels. Buy a pulse oximeter and check it out. If you have COPD or ischaemic heart disease it could make you unwell. Using crap cheap masks is a waste of time. Wearing them doesn't work.



There's no evidence for any of the above.

Viral load matters both to whether you get infected and how severely.
The viral load of a particle is miniscule compared to the viral load in droplets, the the particles disperse quickly and don't travel far.

We would have had dentists and doctors and nurses passing out from wearing masks all day if the reduced oxygen had any merit.
People with COPD or heart disease so severe should avoid all settings such as supermarkets or public transport in this pandemic.

So many healthcare workers got infected because the infected \ suspected patients weren't wearing masks.
A surgical mask won't protect you if you walk into a room that an infected patient has exhaled \ coughed droplets into.


----------



## Leo

Susie2017 said:


> Regretfully I cant stay on here all day.



No, you can't. Dangerous misinformation such as you have been posting is the reason why medical discussions aren't usually permitted here. 

You were given ample opportunity to provide any evidence to back up your assertion.


----------



## johnwilliams

maybe i am wrong in my thinking ,but cant get out of my head reading his/her? post  is susie2017  from u.s. (republican supporter of a certain someone) ?


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> So many healthcare workers got infected because the infected \ suspected patients weren't wearing masks.


I posted before about why so many healthcare workers were infected with Covid19 early on. The protocol in hospitals and nursing homes when a patient has breathing difficulties is to put them on an oxygen enriched air supply. It is usual for such air supplies to have a humidifier so that the patients airway doesn't dry out. The standard mask used does not filter the exhaled air from the patient. The net result is that the infected patient exhaled aerosolized virus particles. This problem was first identified in nursing homes in Washington State. The solution was found by a doctor and engineer in Italy who adapted a full face diving mask for use with the respirator (non-ICU version, usually a C-PAP device).

The main reason for the prevalence of MRSA and other infections in Irish hospitals is medical and non medical staff not following hand washing protocols. I suspect there will be a decrease in such infections in future.


----------



## joer

I just heard a case of a customer, a teacher, in a shop , wearing his face mask, when two men came in not wearing any. There was a notice in the window saying , no mask,no entry. He suggested to them that they should be wearing their masks only to be told in no uncertain terms to f..k off and they hoped that he got Covid, he said.. A confrontation took place between them . A female identified herself as an off duty garda . She ignored the two men and told him to stop arguing or leave the shop. He asked her to prove that she was a garda but she told him that she was off duty and did not have identification on her. He asked her to confront the two guys who were smirking at him but she ignored them. He asked to talk to a manager but no one was available . She left the shop and someone who observed what was going on told him that she was a garda. The shop assistants said that they stopped asking people to wear masks because of the abuse that they were getting. 
So much for a notice in a shop window and no following up on it , the shopkeeper owner not the staff. 
So much for been a customer trying to do the right thing. 
So much for the garda .
So much for people not bothering to wear face masks and getting away with it.


----------



## mathepac

The old story here unfortunately, lots of rules and laws, zero enforcement.


----------



## odyssey06

When they didn't put the onus on shops to enforce it, and provide any real guidelines on establishing who is exempt, it was an abandoned policy.
e.g. Shops can be fined if someone smokes in them.


----------



## valery

Passenger kicked off train ‘in the middle of nowhere’ after refusing to wear mask
					

Man accused of ‘disturbing public order’




					www.independent.co.uk
				




Different approach in France to ensuring compliance with the rules around mask wearing


----------



## Purple

joer said:


> I just heard a case of a customer, a teacher, in a shop , wearing his face mask, when two men came in not wearing any. There was a notice in the window saying , no mask,no entry. He suggested to them that they should be wearing their masks only to be told in no uncertain terms to f..k off and they hoped that he got Covid, he said.. A confrontation took place between them . A female identified herself as an off duty garda . She ignored the two men and told him to stop arguing or leave the shop. He asked her to prove that she was a garda but she told him that she was off duty and did not have identification on her. He asked her to confront the two guys who were smirking at him but she ignored them. He asked to talk to a manager but no one was available . She left the shop and someone who observed what was going on told him that she was a garda. The shop assistants said that they stopped asking people to wear masks because of the abuse that they were getting.
> So much for a notice in a shop window and no following up on it , the shopkeeper owner not the staff.
> So much for been a customer trying to do the right thing.
> So much for the garda .
> So much for people not bothering to wear face masks and getting away with it.


What's surprising about that is that it's not surprising. The Garda in question should lose their job. I presume there was CCTV in the shop. A complain to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission should be the next step by the mask wearing teacher... except that the teacher probably doesn't want to face months or years of low level intimidation by the Gardai.


----------



## joer

This is another example of rules and guidelines been implemented but nobody to enforce them. 
By the sound of that man I would not be surprised if he follows up on this and he should.


----------



## Leo

Purple said:


> The Garda in question should lose their job. I presume there was CCTV in the shop. A complain to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission should be the next step by the mask wearing teacher...



Yeah, a Garda identifying themselves as such giving orders and then refusing to provide their identity isn't acceptable.


----------

