This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/world/europe/uk-coronavirus-masks-mandate.html

The article has changed 19 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
After Months of Debate, England Requires Face Masks for Shoppers After Months of Debate, England Requires Face Masks for Shoppers
(about 2 hours later)
LONDON — Britons, a people famously averse to seeming ruffled in times of distress, have taken slowly, if at all, to face masks during the coronavirus pandemic. Jim Williams says people in his home city, Newcastle, have even yelled at him and shot him angry looks when he wore one.LONDON — Britons, a people famously averse to seeming ruffled in times of distress, have taken slowly, if at all, to face masks during the coronavirus pandemic. Jim Williams says people in his home city, Newcastle, have even yelled at him and shot him angry looks when he wore one.
“Brits would rather be sick than embarrassed,” said Mr. Williams, 31, adding that his own family had turned down masks he bought for them. “We’re all very concerned with doing what other people are doing, and not wanting to be seen as being hysterical or ridiculous.”“Brits would rather be sick than embarrassed,” said Mr. Williams, 31, adding that his own family had turned down masks he bought for them. “We’re all very concerned with doing what other people are doing, and not wanting to be seen as being hysterical or ridiculous.”
Prime Minister Boris Johnson, rushing to reopen the hardest-hit country in Europe, weighed in on Tuesday on the side of embarrassment rather than sickness: He mandated that people wear masks inside shops and supermarkets in England, putting an end to months of equivocation on the matter.Prime Minister Boris Johnson, rushing to reopen the hardest-hit country in Europe, weighed in on Tuesday on the side of embarrassment rather than sickness: He mandated that people wear masks inside shops and supermarkets in England, putting an end to months of equivocation on the matter.
Many scientists have found the dithering over face coverings mystifying and uneasily reminiscent of Britain’s delay in imposing a lockdown in March, part of a laissez-faire approach to the pandemic that has drawn intense criticism. In March, Mr. Johnson proclaimed Britain “a land of liberty” as he resisted following countries across Europe into lockdown. He, himself, later became seriously ill with the virus.Many scientists have found the dithering over face coverings mystifying and uneasily reminiscent of Britain’s delay in imposing a lockdown in March, part of a laissez-faire approach to the pandemic that has drawn intense criticism. In March, Mr. Johnson proclaimed Britain “a land of liberty” as he resisted following countries across Europe into lockdown. He, himself, later became seriously ill with the virus.
Britain now has the third-highest death toll in the world from Covid-19 — more than 50,000 by one official tally, and about 45,000 by another — behind only the United States and Brazil. Scientists say the Conservative government’s slow reactions have cost thousands of lives.Britain now has the third-highest death toll in the world from Covid-19 — more than 50,000 by one official tally, and about 45,000 by another — behind only the United States and Brazil. Scientists say the Conservative government’s slow reactions have cost thousands of lives.
The reversal over face masks, set to take effect on July 24, pulls England into line with other European countries, like Germany, Italy and Spain — France plans to make them mandatory in enclosed spaces on Aug. 1 — and with Scotland, which is part of Britain but sets its own health policy. About half of U.S. states require masks in some public spaces, but the rules vary widely.The reversal over face masks, set to take effect on July 24, pulls England into line with other European countries, like Germany, Italy and Spain — France plans to make them mandatory in enclosed spaces on Aug. 1 — and with Scotland, which is part of Britain but sets its own health policy. About half of U.S. states require masks in some public spaces, but the rules vary widely.
Britain has largely avoided the partisan debate over masks that has engulfed the United States. Instead, the government’s hesitation to mandate them has stemmed from internal debates among scientific advisers about the masks’ usefulness, and an apparent concern about ensuring that a resource in short supply was used where it was needed most.Britain has largely avoided the partisan debate over masks that has engulfed the United States. Instead, the government’s hesitation to mandate them has stemmed from internal debates among scientific advisers about the masks’ usefulness, and an apparent concern about ensuring that a resource in short supply was used where it was needed most.
But there were hints on Tuesday of an American-style divide on the matter.But there were hints on Tuesday of an American-style divide on the matter.
In an almost empty House of Commons, the Conservative lawmaker Desmond Swayne railed on Tuesday against what he called “this monstrous imposition against myself and a number of outraged and reluctant constituents.”In an almost empty House of Commons, the Conservative lawmaker Desmond Swayne railed on Tuesday against what he called “this monstrous imposition against myself and a number of outraged and reluctant constituents.”
“Nothing,” he said, “would make me less likely to go shopping than the thought of having to mask up.”“Nothing,” he said, “would make me less likely to go shopping than the thought of having to mask up.”
The police also bristled at being asked to enforce the new rules by levying fines of up to 100 pounds, or $125, with an officers’ union calling it “unrealistic and unfair” to expect them to patrol shop aisles.The police also bristled at being asked to enforce the new rules by levying fines of up to 100 pounds, or $125, with an officers’ union calling it “unrealistic and unfair” to expect them to patrol shop aisles.
For shops that had already told customers to wear masks, the requirement came as a relief. Just as the government’s slowness in imposing a lockdown in March had forced decisions about closures onto individual citizens and shopkeepers, so too had its reluctance to make a rule about face masks left people and businesses struggling to chart their own paths.For shops that had already told customers to wear masks, the requirement came as a relief. Just as the government’s slowness in imposing a lockdown in March had forced decisions about closures onto individual citizens and shopkeepers, so too had its reluctance to make a rule about face masks left people and businesses struggling to chart their own paths.
“Obviously, the pandemic isn’t over, and we only really wanted to open if we could keep everyone as safe as possible,” said Gayle Lazda, a bookseller at the London Review Bookshop in central London, which has required masks since it reopened this month. “Just like before the lockdown happened, we closed the shop because it seemed like the only sensible thing to do.”“Obviously, the pandemic isn’t over, and we only really wanted to open if we could keep everyone as safe as possible,” said Gayle Lazda, a bookseller at the London Review Bookshop in central London, which has required masks since it reopened this month. “Just like before the lockdown happened, we closed the shop because it seemed like the only sensible thing to do.”
Some scientists had pleaded for months with Mr. Johnson’s government to heed the growing evidence that masks could help stop the spread of the virus. But the government resisted, with England’s deputy chief medical officer saying on April 3 that “there is no evidence that general wearing of face masks by the public who are well affects the spread of the disease in our society.”Some scientists had pleaded for months with Mr. Johnson’s government to heed the growing evidence that masks could help stop the spread of the virus. But the government resisted, with England’s deputy chief medical officer saying on April 3 that “there is no evidence that general wearing of face masks by the public who are well affects the spread of the disease in our society.”
As recently as April 28, the government’s powerful Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies retroactively edited the minutes of a previous meeting to emphasize that “it would be unreasonable to claim a large benefit from wearing a mask.”As recently as April 28, the government’s powerful Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies retroactively edited the minutes of a previous meeting to emphasize that “it would be unreasonable to claim a large benefit from wearing a mask.”
The advisers’ misgivings reflected what critics called an overly rigid approach to the science. The advisers emphasized a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials, a bar that outside scientists said was impossibly high to meet, especially given the difficulties of measuring how one person’s mask might protect untold others.The advisers’ misgivings reflected what critics called an overly rigid approach to the science. The advisers emphasized a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials, a bar that outside scientists said was impossibly high to meet, especially given the difficulties of measuring how one person’s mask might protect untold others.
“Some scientists feel that a very high level of certainty is required before advice is given for the public to undertake wearing a mask or other behaviors that would reduce disease transmission,” said Paul Edelstein, an emeritus professor at the University of Pennsylvania, who helped write an influential report to British scientific advisers encouraging face coverings this month.“Some scientists feel that a very high level of certainty is required before advice is given for the public to undertake wearing a mask or other behaviors that would reduce disease transmission,” said Paul Edelstein, an emeritus professor at the University of Pennsylvania, who helped write an influential report to British scientific advisers encouraging face coverings this month.
Masks have been mandatory on public transportation in England since mid-June, and the government had previously encouraged — but not required — masks in enclosed spaces. But the minutes of their meetings show that the government’s scientific advisers fretted about the possibility of masks making people more willing to leave home with symptoms, or to violate social distancing measures.Masks have been mandatory on public transportation in England since mid-June, and the government had previously encouraged — but not required — masks in enclosed spaces. But the minutes of their meetings show that the government’s scientific advisers fretted about the possibility of masks making people more willing to leave home with symptoms, or to violate social distancing measures.
Trisha Greenhalgh, a professor of primary care at the University of Oxford, published an analysis on April 9 asking the government to consider how little there was to lose, and how much to gain, from encouraging the widespread use of masks. She said in an interview that the issue required considering a wider range of evidence than some scientists were trained to trust, like studies of super-spreader events on cruise ships.Trisha Greenhalgh, a professor of primary care at the University of Oxford, published an analysis on April 9 asking the government to consider how little there was to lose, and how much to gain, from encouraging the widespread use of masks. She said in an interview that the issue required considering a wider range of evidence than some scientists were trained to trust, like studies of super-spreader events on cruise ships.
“They’re creatures of their own upbringing,” she said of some of the government’s scientific advisers. “They have a lot of ingrained assumptions about what counts as rigor, and so then the science isn’t quite rigorous enough.”“They’re creatures of their own upbringing,” she said of some of the government’s scientific advisers. “They have a lot of ingrained assumptions about what counts as rigor, and so then the science isn’t quite rigorous enough.”
Updated July 7, 2020
The coronavirus can stay aloft for hours in tiny droplets in stagnant air, infecting people as they inhale, mounting scientific evidence suggests. This risk is highest in crowded indoor spaces with poor ventilation, and may help explain super-spreading events reported in meatpacking plants, churches and restaurants. It’s unclear how often the virus is spread via these tiny droplets, or aerosols, compared with larger droplets that are expelled when a sick person coughs or sneezes, or transmitted through contact with contaminated surfaces, said Linsey Marr, an aerosol expert at Virginia Tech. Aerosols are released even when a person without symptoms exhales, talks or sings, according to Dr. Marr and more than 200 other experts, who have outlined the evidence in an open letter to the World Health Organization.
Common symptoms include fever, a dry cough, fatigue and difficulty breathing or shortness of breath. Some of these symptoms overlap with those of the flu, making detection difficult, but runny noses and stuffy sinuses are less common. The C.D.C. has also added chills, muscle pain, sore throat, headache and a new loss of the sense of taste or smell as symptoms to look out for. Most people fall ill five to seven days after exposure, but symptoms may appear in as few as two days or as many as 14 days.
Scientists around the country have tried to identify everyday materials that do a good job of filtering microscopic particles. In recent tests, HEPA furnace filters scored high, as did vacuum cleaner bags, fabric similar to flannel pajamas and those of 600-count pillowcases. Other materials tested included layered coffee filters and scarves and bandannas. These scored lower, but still captured a small percentage of particles.
A commentary published this month on the website of the British Journal of Sports Medicine points out that covering your face during exercise “comes with issues of potential breathing restriction and discomfort” and requires “balancing benefits versus possible adverse events.” Masks do alter exercise, says Cedric X. Bryant, the president and chief science officer of the American Council on Exercise, a nonprofit organization that funds exercise research and certifies fitness professionals. “In my personal experience,” he says, “heart rates are higher at the same relative intensity when you wear a mask.” Some people also could experience lightheadedness during familiar workouts while masked, says Len Kravitz, a professor of exercise science at the University of New Mexico.
The steroid, dexamethasone, is the first treatment shown to reduce mortality in severely ill patients, according to scientists in Britain. The drug appears to reduce inflammation caused by the immune system, protecting the tissues. In the study, dexamethasone reduced deaths of patients on ventilators by one-third, and deaths of patients on oxygen by one-fifth.
The coronavirus emergency relief package gives many American workers paid leave if they need to take time off because of the virus. It gives qualified workers two weeks of paid sick leave if they are ill, quarantined or seeking diagnosis or preventive care for coronavirus, or if they are caring for sick family members. It gives 12 weeks of paid leave to people caring for children whose schools are closed or whose child care provider is unavailable because of the coronavirus. It is the first time the United States has had widespread federally mandated paid leave, and includes people who don’t typically get such benefits, like part-time and gig economy workers. But the measure excludes at least half of private-sector workers, including those at the country’s largest employers, and gives small employers significant leeway to deny leave.
So far, the evidence seems to show it does. A widely cited paper published in April suggests that people are most infectious about two days before the onset of coronavirus symptoms and estimated that 44 percent of new infections were a result of transmission from people who were not yet showing symptoms. Recently, a top expert at the World Health Organization stated that transmission of the coronavirus by people who did not have symptoms was “very rare,” but she later walked back that statement.
Touching contaminated objects and then infecting ourselves with the germs is not typically how the virus spreads. But it can happen. A number of studies of flu, rhinovirus, coronavirus and other microbes have shown that respiratory illnesses, including the new coronavirus, can spread by touching contaminated surfaces, particularly in places like day care centers, offices and hospitals. But a long chain of events has to happen for the disease to spread that way. The best way to protect yourself from coronavirus — whether it’s surface transmission or close human contact — is still social distancing, washing your hands, not touching your face and wearing masks.
A study by European scientists is the first to document a strong statistical link between genetic variations and Covid-19, the illness caused by the coronavirus. Having Type A blood was linked to a 50 percent increase in the likelihood that a patient would need to get oxygen or to go on a ventilator, according to the new study.
If air travel is unavoidable, there are some steps you can take to protect yourself. Most important: Wash your hands often, and stop touching your face. If possible, choose a window seat. A study from Emory University found that during flu season, the safest place to sit on a plane is by a window, as people sitting in window seats had less contact with potentially sick people. Disinfect hard surfaces. When you get to your seat and your hands are clean, use disinfecting wipes to clean the hard surfaces at your seat like the head and arm rest, the seatbelt buckle, the remote, screen, seat back pocket and the tray table. If the seat is hard and nonporous or leather or pleather, you can wipe that down, too. (Using wipes on upholstered seats could lead to a wet seat and spreading of germs rather than killing them.)
If you’ve been exposed to the coronavirus or think you have, and have a fever or symptoms like a cough or difficulty breathing, call a doctor. They should give you advice on whether you should be tested, how to get tested, and how to seek medical treatment without potentially infecting or exposing others.
Britain was far from alone in distrusting masks. Not knowing the extent of symptomless transmission, scientists in the United States and with the World Health Organization were also slow to encourage their use, noted Venki Ramakrishnan, the president of the Royal Society, a scientific body in Britain.Britain was far from alone in distrusting masks. Not knowing the extent of symptomless transmission, scientists in the United States and with the World Health Organization were also slow to encourage their use, noted Venki Ramakrishnan, the president of the Royal Society, a scientific body in Britain.
But Britons proved especially slow to voluntarily adopt masks, with only 21 percent of people saying they wore one in public, according to an analysis by YouGov published in June.But Britons proved especially slow to voluntarily adopt masks, with only 21 percent of people saying they wore one in public, according to an analysis by YouGov published in June.
That put Britain far behind almost all of Europe, Asia and the Americas. Even in France, which has not yet required masks in shops, 79 percent of people wore them, YouGov said. So did 69 percent of Americans.That put Britain far behind almost all of Europe, Asia and the Americas. Even in France, which has not yet required masks in shops, 79 percent of people wore them, YouGov said. So did 69 percent of Americans.
Beyond the discomfort, Britons complained in polls that they felt self-conscious, silly and embarrassed in masks. That reflected in part what Peter York, a prominent social commentator, described as a longstanding aversion — particularly among the upper classes — to seeming rattled in the face of disease or distress.Beyond the discomfort, Britons complained in polls that they felt self-conscious, silly and embarrassed in masks. That reflected in part what Peter York, a prominent social commentator, described as a longstanding aversion — particularly among the upper classes — to seeming rattled in the face of disease or distress.
“There’s a class-based idea that anything too valetudinarian, too conspicuously hygienic, is middle-class,” he said, using a long word for being unduly anxious about one’s health. “It’s one of the sort of bravado things of the English upper class, that being madly hygienic is silly.”“There’s a class-based idea that anything too valetudinarian, too conspicuously hygienic, is middle-class,” he said, using a long word for being unduly anxious about one’s health. “It’s one of the sort of bravado things of the English upper class, that being madly hygienic is silly.”
For Ayla Hogg, 22, who has been long been wearing a mask around her village in Scotland, the introduction of a countrywide mandate in recent days was a comfort after months of disconcerting reactions to her mask.For Ayla Hogg, 22, who has been long been wearing a mask around her village in Scotland, the introduction of a countrywide mandate in recent days was a comfort after months of disconcerting reactions to her mask.
“You have people purposely avoiding you, and you feel very self-conscious, like maybe I’m overreacting to this,” she said. “British people are incredibly awkward at the best of times. Going against the norm is very, very odd, and it does make you feel a bit like an outsider.”“You have people purposely avoiding you, and you feel very self-conscious, like maybe I’m overreacting to this,” she said. “British people are incredibly awkward at the best of times. Going against the norm is very, very odd, and it does make you feel a bit like an outsider.”
Aurelien Breeden and Emma Bubola contributed reporting.Aurelien Breeden and Emma Bubola contributed reporting.