Jump to content

Recommended Posts

AS from the 24th July, Masks are to be made Compulsory on Public Transport and in Shops.


What about Pubs and Restaurants. I do not want to name any establishment in particular


but one Pub has become Very busy with people in close proximity drinking together Inside and outside.


It would be very difficult for people to be out Eating and Drinking if wearing a mask.


I suppose People do have a choice to risk a visit to the pub but if someone has become infected

it could easily spread in that sort of environment.


Foxy

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/257821-a-question-of-masks/
Share on other sites

It's about reducing risk - if people are all wearing them in shops and on transport you have reduced the risk


You can't elimate ALL risk


if infections ris after the facemasks then we could be looking at another lockdown (as per other countries)


But what is teh point of the OP? IS it to complain about the masks being compulsory? Or not being universal? It's not clear

You can't when you drink (the beer needs to go in) - but you could when moving around or going to the loo.


But seeing the news a second spike looks possible and secondary issues are being reported with those infected (the young for instance) - I have a thing about long term issues mind as my dad died at 47 from a long term issue started by Diphtheria as a boy.

Cyclemonkey Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Masks are already compulsary on public transport

> and have been since mid June. As you say there is

> a practical issue with masks in pubs and

> restaurants. In theory you could make people wear

> them except when they are sitting at their table.


Yes I know that Masks are supposed to be compulsory on Public Transport. (that is clearly not happening)

I was saying that they now need to be worn in shops and also in Supermarkets.


Why should people sitting at their table be exempt ?

That's where the risk is at its greatest. People laughing and talking out laud.


I do not know the Answer. Perhaps there isn't one.


Seems to of gone very quiet on the subject of a Vaccine.. ?? Wonder why that is ?


Foxy

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's about reducing risk - if people are all

> wearing them in shops and on transport you have

> reduced the risk

>

> You can't elimate ALL risk

>

> if infections ris after the facemasks then we

> could be looking at another lockdown (as per other

> countries)

>

> But what is teh point of the OP? IS it to complain

> about the masks being compulsory? Or not being

> universal? It's not clear


I'm Not complaining about Masks being Compulsory.

I wear a Mask when I go to the Supermarket and to the shops.


I cannot wear one at the Pub, so I have not been back. I have also Not eaten out.

Takeaways and deliveries only.


Foxy

I don't think the UK society has enough of a sense of collective responsibility to pull this off.

The 'compulsory' face masks on public transport is a great theory not working in practice.

People will always think it doesn't apply to them or they can stretch it a bit due to some or other self-entitlement.

Announcing a forward date for start of compulsory wearing of masks in shops gives (to me) exactly the opposite message that needs to be given - it says that doing so is SO urgent that, actually, we'll start doing it next week.

Several months late surely. From a Govt which said masks were not proven to be effective / have limited effective benefit.

The benefits (or otherwise) of masks have have not just been discovered because of this virus, that knowledge already existed !

> Seems to of gone very quiet

> on the subject of a Vaccine.. ??

> Wonder why that is ?


No mystery. It of gone very Quiet because there is nothing notably new for the media to Trumpet. Researching and developing and testing vaccines tends to be a long and Tedious process. If I were inclined to betting on the development that occasions the next media Flare-up, I think I'd go for an AV drug, or one of the other types of antibody treatment.

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cyclemonkey Wrote:

> -

> Why should people sitting at their table be exempt

> ?

> That's where the risk is at its greatest. People

> laughing and talking out laud.

>

> I do not know the Answer. Perhaps there isn't one.

>

i guess that eating and drinking isn't really compatible with mask wearing

I've just ordered a Darth Vader voice changing mask for trips out to the supermarket.


May not be the best protection but when someone complains the self checkout isn't working I will take great delight in saying "Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed"

lol Spartacus.


On Covid itself, it is going to take around two years to have the required data to determine immunity and lasting damage to those who recover from it. None of this is simple where you have so many protracted tangents, around age, underlying health conditions and the ever present unknowns around mutation. We are only six months into this pandemic, although it may feel like forever already. Vaccines take years, have always taken years, and politicians were wrong to not explain that.

I can understand the desire to give the public hope of a way out, but there also needs to be some honesty around this.


The real indicators will probably come in the Autumn, if there is a second spike, and if those who have previously had the virus and recovered, become ill again. We really do need intensive monitoring of all of this to understand as much as possible. The USA clearly shows that the virus is just as prevalent in Summer seasons, but that social distancing does work to keep infection rates down. In Winter, when people are coughing and sneezing from seasonal colds and chest infections, we will HAVE to ramp up the use of face coverings everywhere if we are going to prevent a significant second wave.

binkylilyput Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is this post meant to be a joke or something?!

>

> How can people eat their meal or drink their drink

> while wearing a mask?!


The atmosphere isn't going to be very 'pub like'. Unfortunately many of us just prefer to stay at home. Many pubs and restaurants may need to change how they work permanently.


That's the problem the government has in getting the hospitality industry working.

There was a guy working in a coffee shop just out from prison on Sky News just now -he said working in the coffee shop changed his life.


I don't want to see people like him thrown out of work but I'm also not going to be in coffee houses like I was (twice a day) and if I do I'll be wearing a mask (other than when directly drinking the coffee). This is going to last a lot longer than many people thought so deliveries to home/drinking outside if it's sunny/other options need to be used if this guy and many like him are to stay working.

Anyone who thinks life can return to how it was before is deluded. This is the new reality until we find a medical way to contain this virus. The harsh reality is that any enclosed space where people gather IS going to be different. Some spaces may not be viable under that new reality. It is then up to government to decide who and by how much they subsidise affected sectors. Nightclubs for example, may never reopen in the next few years. This means our economy will have to change. Jobs will have to be created elsewhere. Some may argue that we had become too reliant on the service sector for jobs anyway.


Wearing a face covering is no biggie and I would suggest that anyone moaning about having to do so just isn't seeing the bigger picture. There is a genuine concern that Autumn will see a second wave and although hospitals etc are better prepared now, any second wave is going to be on top of the seasonal flu intake. This would put the NHS under an enormous level of demand and stress that may surpass the peak of the first wave.


My only concern is that shops with door staff/ security will be able to enforce this. Shops that do not have those kinds of personnel may have some problems. Hopefully most people will do the right thing and comply.

If I have covid

I Would stay at home, But there is a possibility I may be ill and not know.

If i Wear a mask, hopefully I will not give it to you, If you wear a mask you may not get it

or spread it, Why cant we just respect others and look after ourselves, I am asthmatic a mask is a pain.

But sooner suffer an asthmatic mask attack, than covid

My Feeling is (cynical some may say) That the reason the government are making mask wearing mandatory in shops is so that when (not IF, WHEN) we have the 2nd wave because of all the idiots congregating in groups going on their holidays to spain etc etc There won't be another lockdown.

Businesses cannot survive another lockdown therefore they can continue trading during the 2nd wave with the argument that 'staff and customers are wearing masks.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...