The Hill You Die On

In 1973 it became compulsory for motorcyclists in the UK to wear crash helmets. This was decried as a ‘gross infringement of personal liberty’ in Parliament, although almost 88% of motorcyclists in the country were wearing helmets anyway. My Dad wore one during the 1960s, when he owned a moped which was quaintly, if highly inappropriately, called an NSU Quickly (its top speed was just 25mph). The helmet saved his life when, in what must have been a bizarrely slow-motion event, he came off the bike and cracked his head on the kerb.

 

When the government brought in legislation in 1983 to make the wearing of seat belts in the front of cars compulsory, motorists protested that it removed their right to have their rib cages crushed by the steering wheel in the event of a collision, and the rights of their passengers to be hurled through the windscreen in similar circumstances. It was only in 1991 that it became mandatory for passengers in the rear of vehicles to wear seat belts. These passengers were more sanguine; few complained.

 

It’s now rare to see someone in a car not wearing a seatbelt, and rarer yet to see anyone on a motorbike not wearing a helmet; the protests about the laws that made them compulsory are now long forgotten. But now we have the controversy and opposition to the wearing of a face mask or other face covering in shops as of Friday, 24^th July 2020, to go with the requirement already in place to wear one on public transport.

Opponents of wearing face masks fall into a number of different camps. There are people who seem to believe that wearing a face mask will dangerously reduce oxygen levels in the wearer, potentially causing death by hypoxia. Were this the case, one would expect doctors, surgeons, other health care professionals, and those whose work environments require them to wear masks for long periods to have been dropping like flies over the years, but I cannot find any evidence to support this.

Some people feel that wearing a mask infringes their human rights, and while I haven’t gone into The Human Rights Act 1998 in detail, there are probably parts of that act which would support that argument. The rights we are afforded under the act may be restricted or withdrawn under certain circumstances however; to prevent disorder, or protect public safety or health for example. Relying on ‘rights’ may not be as watertight as many may think, and not just with regard to masks.

 

A woman in Hyde Park protesting against face masks last Sunday.

I have always believed that the individual has what might best be described as a contract with society. In exchange for the rights an individual has, they have responsibilities. Unfortunately, it seems that those who shout the loudest about their own rights are the most careless in considering the rights of others. In this case, the right not to wear a mask must be balanced against the responsibility to avoid potentially infecting others. And, if someone believes that they have a right not to wear a mask, it is only reasonable for them to respect the rights of shopkeepers not to admit them to their premises without one.

 

There is an argument that face masks do not offer a degree of protection that makes them worth wearing, and it’s true, wearing a mask is not going to categorically prevent the wearer from contracting coronavirus. It will, however, reduce the risk, and more importantly, it will significantly reduce the risk of the wearer transmitting the virus to others. In Vietnam, a country of 97 million people which has a land border with China, an early lockdown and the compulsory wearing of facemasks has meant that the country has had a grand total of 382 cases of coronavirus and precisely no deaths whatsoever.

 

Ah, you might say, Vietnam is a one-party state, where the rule of the Communist Party will brook no opposition. The compulsory wearing of face masks (or muzzles as some commentators have tediously taken to dubbing them) in the UK would be just the first step on the road to totalitarianism (apparently). This train of thought must go hand in hand with the ‘plandemic’ theory that posits that Covid-19 is a hoax, part of a global conspiracy with population control at its heart. This sort of theory assumes a level of competence on the part of the UK government, and a degree of co-operation between governments the world over that frankly is not supported by even the most casual observation.

 

I wonder if those who subscribe to the idea that making us wear masks is part of a conspiracy to control us have ever considered that it is just as possible that they are being influenced into not wearing them as part of a plan to increase the rate of infection in pursuit of the dubious herd immunity theory?

 

Some say that people aren’t wearing face masks properly, thereby reducing their effectiveness, and there is truth in that. The idea is supported by Professor Susan Michie, a member of Government scientific advisory group Sage, who told the Evening Standard that she had seen people wearing masks that didn't cover their nose, or removing them by pulling on the front, rather than the straps. The idea that because people do not wear masks correctly there is no point in making anyone wear them is comparable to saying that because some drivers do not observe speed limits, we might as well abolish them. Better, as Professor Michie went on to say, to teach people how to wear masks correctly.

 

It has been said that making the wearing of masks mandatory now, some four months after lockdown began, and now that it is being relaxed, is the ultimate in shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted and is actually about ‘maintaining the fear factor.’ More likely, it is that had we been required to wear masks from 23^rd March when lockdown began, demand would have outstripped supply in the same way it did with toilet rolls, as we saw shelves in supermarkets stripped bare. And, as lockdown eases and people are being encouraged to return to the shops, to their normal place of work, and to use public transport more, social distancing becomes more difficult. As people spend more time in closer proximity to others, the need to wear masks becomes more important, not less.

 

Some opponents of face masks believe that making them compulsory will stop people from going to the shops, that it will be the death of the High Street. A more probable potential cause of the demise of the High Street is another lockdown if cases spike again; wearing masks is actually more likely to save the High Street than kill it.

Wearing masks is widespread and taken for granted in many countries but even during this pandemic, when in April, 83% of Italians and 63% of Spaniards wore them, just 25% of us Brits did. It makes me wonder if there is an element of British exceptionalism at work here.

I admit that in previous weeks I have worn a mask only rarely (it was required when I made a visit to the doctors’ surgery), but I have started wearing one to the shops recently, and I will wear one when shopping from Friday onwards.  I don’t feel that I am being coerced nor being turned into a ‘servile dehumanised automaton’ by doing so, not for the hour or so I spend in shops each week. I haven’t used public transport since March, and don’t have any immediate plans to do so, but I’ll happily wear a mask if and when I do.

 

The opposition and hysteria that surround mask wearing seem completely disproportionate, but for some people it seems to be the hill they are prepared to die on…perhaps literally.