Speaking the day before the re-opening, Prime Minister Boris
Johnson had expressed optimism, saying "People should shop, and shop with
confidence but they should, of course, observe the rules on social distancing as
well.”
With the prospect of the doors to Primark, Sports Direct, TK
Maxx, and Debenhams et al re-opening, queues inevitably formed. Just as
inevitably, many other people took to social media to huff, puff, and generally
tut-tut at the queueing shoppers.
 |
| An orderly queue as shoppers wait to get into Primark. |
 |
| A less orderly queue at Nike Town |
Pictures that appeared in the media and on social media
suggested that the practice of social distancing was inconsistent. Shoppers
queuing outside some branches of Primark seemed to be conforming, outside Nike
Town, not so much. At Bicester Village, an outlet shopping centre in
Oxfordshire, any pretence of social distancing seemed to have been forsaken
completely.
 |
| Bicester Village: Big crowds and no social distancing prompted calls for the shopping outlet to be closed. |
In pictures from Monday, some shoppers are seen wearing
masks, and on the same day that the shops re-opened, the wearing of face
coverings on public transport became mandatory, but – in England at least –
there are no overarching rules on what sort of masks or coverings should be
worn, or where, although there are suggestions. When I have been to the
supermarket – I’ve rarely been to any other type of shop since lockdown – I’ve
seen people wearing the whole gamut of coverings, from home-made coverings
clearly fashioned from an old t-shirt to masks that wouldn’t look out of place
paired with a full Hazmat suit. So far, I’ve not worn a mask to Tesco (or
anywhere else for that matter), although I’d be more than happy to if it became
either mandatory or simply strongly recommended. I’m perfectly happy to wear
one if I use public transport or go anywhere that requires me to as a condition
of entry.
Not everyone is happy about wearing masks, though. In Orange
County, California, masks have polarised opinions to the extent that there have
been protests in support of wearing them - and against wearing them.[1]
Last month, Dr Nichole Quick – who was then county health office – issued an
order requiring residents and visitors to Orange County to wear face coverings
while in a public place, at work or visiting a business where they are unable
to stay six feet apart. Dr Quick subsequently resigned after receiving threats;
her replacement subsequently made the mask wearing requirement voluntary, rather
than mandatory.
Opposition to wearing masks or other coverings seems principally
to come in two forms. Some people claim that they are unsafe inasmuch as they
reduce oxygen levels (consequently causing co2 inhalation), which must come as
something of a surprise to doctors, dentists, surgeons, and other health care
professionals, who have worn masks for extended periods for donkey’s years with
no apparent ill effects.
There is also opposition to the wearing of face coverings or
masks on the grounds that they afford no protection; the analogy that is banded
about is that they are “as much use against a microscopic virus as a chain-link
fence would be against mosquitoes.” This – willfully or ignorantly – misses the
point about wearing face coverings or masks, which is that research suggests
that masks might help keep people with COVID-19 from unknowingly spreading it,
that is to say that they are as much – if not more – about protecting others
from potential infection rather than the wearer. The World Health Organisation
(WHO) recommends that face coverings are worn in public where social distancing
is not possible. As the saying goes, “your mask protects me, mine protects you.”
As much as there is opposition to the wearing of masks on
the grounds of the ineffectiveness, there is also ideological opposition, such
as that expressed by people such as Peter Hitchens, the conservative journalist
and author. Hitchens has been very critical of the UK government’s response to
coronavirus generally, arguing that COVID-19 is not nearly as serious to the
general population as is widely believed. He has called the UK government’s
lockdown policy “The Great Panic.”
Some of the points that Hitchens raises about coronavirus
and the government’s response have some validity, some not so much. His
argument that some of the statistics around coronavirus are dubious has some
merit (little distinction is made between people who have died as a direct result
of coronavirus and those who have had the virus but died from a different
cause). The view that comparisons between the numbers of people dying in the UK
and other countries are meaningless as different countries calculate their
figures differently supports the government’s decision to stop publishing such
comparisons, although they only did so once the UK’s death rate surpassed the
other countries they were previously making comparisons with.
In a recent blog post on the Mail on Sunday site[2],
Hitchens, (who believes that “the Left now controls every lever of power,”
despite the fact that we have had a Conservative government for a decade, and
that they significantly increased their majority in December 2019), railed against
the requirement that masks be worn on public transport. Hitchens puts forward
the chain-link fence versus mosquitoes argument but also objects on the
grounds that they are about control of the population rather than the virus. He
says, “I am fairly sure these measures, like the house arrest and sunbathing
bans which came before, have another purpose. They accustom us to being told
what to do. Stand there. Wait there. Don’t use cash. Don’t cross that line.
They permanently change the relationship between the individual and the state.”
He goes on, “Not only can the Government now tell us
where we must live and when or if we can go out… It can now even tell us what
to wear.” I presume that he
raised the same arguments when wearing seat belts in cars, or wearing motorcycle
crash helmets, became compulsory.
On Twitter, Hitchens posted a picture taken in an Oxford
shopping centre with a comment - Stand there. Do this. Wear that. Wait here.
Stay home. Now they tell us which way to walk – to which he obviously
objects. One wonders how he has ever survived the experience of underground
stations and airports, where one-way systems and no entry signs are
commonplace; presumably he enjoys swimming against the tide.
Maybe face coverings, and especially the disposable masks that can be bought in
supermarkets, are an effective measure against the transmission of the virus. Maybe they are a sinister further step in controlling the populace. There is one hazard that definitely arises from them, however, and that is litter. Keep
Britain Tidy has reported a rise in Personal Protective Equipment being
discarded on the streets, and I have seen masks and gloves discarded on the
pavement and in car parks. In the car park at Tesco recently, I had to suggest
to a woman who had dumped a pair of disposable gloves in a trolley that she had
finished with that she should throw them in a bin or take them home. She did so,
albeit somewhat grudgingly.
In the fullness of time we will probably be able to work out
whether compulsory face-mask wearing in confined spaces such as on public
transport has a positive effect on reducing transmission of the coronavirus (my
guess is that it does), or whether it is required is for a more sinister reason
(my guess would be that it isn’t), but whichever it is, if you do wear a mask
and/or gloves, don’t be a dick, dispose of them properly.
No comments:
Post a Comment