Darc19 wrote: » More misinformed covid police. In a medical situation including opticians and dental, the people working in the place have their own medical protection. Hence there is no MANDATORY requirement for those attending to wear masks. I really wish the covid police would engage brain cells first.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » So what about offices? Still only recommended if social distancing is difficult. People will see that as a choice.
CalamariFritti wrote: » Another reason why I was always against them. I mean I think all this masks stuff is for the most part totally crazy anyway but lets assume for a moment I'd come around to the masks indoors thing. I always knew it wouldn't end there. There'll always be someone even crazier than that, making noise for masks everywhere even outside. And after that I'm sure someone will make a case for wearing them in your own house. When I heard that Spain - who seem to have gotten pretty much everything arseways with COVID - made them mandatory outdoors I knew they had to be resisted with every fibre. Lunatics trying to take over the asylum here too.
Tork wrote: » Oh I think you'd be delighted if a rule about wearing masks outdoors was brought in here. It'd give you something new to rant about.
Elmer Blooker wrote: » And if we are ordered to wear them outdoors like in France will you wear one or will you think its over the top?
Jim Gazebo wrote: » I have no problem wearing a mask in a shop if that the advice given. Outside I'd be reluctant to comply with unless the place was rammed with people. That seems logically over the top to wear a mask everywhere when outside. As an aside, the vitriol towards those not wearing a mask has to be stopped as well. If they have a reason for not wearing it it is none of your business. Genuine q, how long is the mask requirement going to be for ? Forever?
[Deleted User] wrote: » Why would it be forever?
Jim Gazebo wrote: » I've seen no mention of it being a temporary measure? The virus isn't going away. In 10 years time we'll still be getting daily numbers and wearing masks from what I can see. There seems to be no plan to get out of this mess, just limit it constantly. It's demoralising.
MadYaker wrote: » Hong Kong also mandates them outdoors. How would you rate their response to COVID-19? Anyway it’ll never happen here so untwist your knickers.
McGiver wrote: » Of course it wouldn't end there. Because mandating masks just in shops is hardly a sufficient measure. Countries that handled the virus well had universal mask requirement for both indoors and outdoors. When the requirement was lifted cases shot up significantly. Good example of this is Czechia, which has 10 times less deaths and 4 times less cases per capita than Ireland. Mask requirement was lifted end of June and they now have a second wave equivalent in numbers to first one. Mandating masks in shops and not elsewhere indoors including the workplace is illogical and insufficient. As for outdoors - I would be OK with masks mandated for city centres, towns centres and built up areas, basically anywhere where there are people around. It's not a rocket science. And pubs should absolutely not reopen - it's impossible to maintain social distancing or wear a mask in pub and they have been proven to be a vector in the US (Texas) and elsewhere.
boggerman1 wrote: » How do some of ye function at all.masks masks everywhere,24/7.eye goggles next Twitter crusade.since the whole mask crap started I see less use of the hand sanitizers.but hey the masks crowd know best.
Hunky Monster wrote: » I'll be making full use of the legislation. A mask causes me "severe distress", case closed.
Jim Gazebo wrote: » As an aside, the vitriol towards those not wearing a mask has to be stopped as well. If they have a reason for not wearing it it is none of your business.
robinph wrote: » Whilst wearing masks in offices would help with reducing the transmission, the purpose of masks is also to prevent spreading to unknown people which then complicates tracing. Perfectly sensible to wear a mask in the workplace, but I can see why they haven't made it compulsory. Making it compulsory would have more people objecting to them and then also not wearing them when out and about.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » Are people really comfortable going to places like this with aerosol a route of transmission? Having to sit in an empty waiting area but you don't know who was there before you and yourself breathing it all in.
odyssey06 wrote: » A lot of offices will likely consider making them compulsory as a company rule. That's more difficult per retail outlet.
Jim_Hodge wrote: » Sure you will. You're such a hard man standing up for freedom. You're a credit to the country. How about thinking about the possibility that you could actually help by wearing one?
ExMachina1000 wrote: » Was in a shop in a Dublin shopping centre on Sunday. I had no mask on even though I wear one everyday during work. Young fellow came over to me to tell me since the shop is small I need to have a mask on. I noticed the near by staff were all standing ,watching and waiting for my reaction. No bother says I, you are dead right. My bad. End
odyssey06 wrote: » Severe distress? People with severe asthma can wear them and want you to do likewise. Inconvenience and a bit of difficulty isn't severe distress. Which box do you really fall into? People who abuse the "severe distress" clause are as bad as people who park in disabled spaces without legitimate reason and deserve as much contempt.