Facemasks in the pro shop?

[Slab]

There is one that point the scientists are fully agreed on - if you are only wearing a face covering such as a bandana, fabric mask, or a single layer face mask the you are not protected from getting the virus.

I presume you have some sort of fully certified mask. The current requirement is about give a small degree of protection for others from the wearer rather than the other way round.

Do they mean a fabric mask offers zero protection from getting the virus or do they mean a fabric mask does not offer full protection from getting the virus?

There's a helluva lot of wiggle room in there, for me even a 10% benefit over wearing no mask is reason enough to put a fabric one on

 

[howbow88]

No, I don't think it is. I find that the one size masks don't actually fit all and are claustrophobic, so I understand people not wanting to wear them. I also wonder why, when the deaths have dropped below the national average for this time of year, we are now being asked to wear them? We've had them on public transport for a while; if they were that important why not earlier and why wait to the 24th? I'd be interested to see the scientific reasoning behind having them now, when the death rate has lowered so much without them, rather than the political point scoring reasons. I think you might find that's where some of the issues are coming from, not selfishness.

The biggest issue with everyone wearing them is you will no longer easily recognise those shoppers with no concept of social distancing whatsoever, as before the 24th they were the ones wearing the masks.

I'm trying not to bash the government too much at the moment, as this is an insanely difficult situation to manage. However, I can't help but feel like they are implementing this mask ruling purely to make it look like they are doing something. None of this really makes sense - when this all kicked off, we were told by scientists that masks make zero difference. Now it is apparently important to wear one, but not for another 10 days?

It's all a bit strange.

 

[jim8flog]

Do they mean a fabric mask offers zero protection from getting the virus or do they mean a fabric mask does not offer full protection from getting the virus?

There's a helluva lot of wiggle room in there, for me even a 10% benefit over wearing no mask is reason enough to put a fabric one on

I think from all the virolgists I have watched on the TV over the past few months the view is that if the virus gets on to the outside of such face masks then you are going to breath it in because the gaps in the fabric etc are to big and there are too many air gaps around the edges of them.

 

[Foxholer]

I'm pretty certain that Golf Clubs/Pros are quite capable of creating an environment that doesn't require players to go into the Pro Shop simply for competitions/rounds. I also expect that a way could be found to provide the 'usual' supplies demanded outside of the 'shop' environment. If not (logistically possible) then I'm sure the Shop could acquire a supply of masks!

It's no big deal, just another 'restriction', brought about by the biggest medical crisis in over a decade or more! So just obey the rules - like proper golfers should always do!

 

[CliveW]

I wonder how many who are against the wearing of face masks would refuse to wear them if dealing with hazardous materials such as asbestos or chemicals. The mask is to reduce the risk of infection not prevent it. We have been wearing them in shops since Friday and to be honest they are not the most comfortable of things to wear, but if it reduces any slight risk, I'll continue to wear one. You do get used to them and if you aren't wearing one, you will stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I wonder how many who are against the wearing of face masks would refuse to wear them if dealing with hazardous materials such as asbestos or chemicals. The mask is to reduce the risk of infection not prevent it. We have been wearing them in shops since Friday and to be honest they are not the most comfortable of things to wear, but if it reduces any slight risk, I'll continue to wear one. You do get used to them and if you aren't wearing one, you will stick out like a sore thumb.

I'll wear whatever safety equipment I deem appropriate to the task or which has been mandated for the task.

The discussion is not about wearing the mask, it is about why the measure has been deemed necessary now we seem to be at a much lower rate of infection, and consequently danger, but it wasn't deemed necessary when the virus was much more rampant? No-one can seem to provide a valid reason other than a bit of political point scoring

 

[Blue in Munich]

I'm trying not to bash the government too much at the moment, as this is an insanely difficult situation to manage. However, I can't help but feel like they are implementing this mask ruling purely to make it look like they are doing something. None of this really makes sense - when this all kicked off, we were told by scientists that masks make zero difference. Now it is apparently important to wear one, but not for another 10 days?

It's all a bit strange.

Couldn't agree more, there appears to be absolutely no logic to it other than responding to Mrs. Sturgeon's edict, which does not reflect well on the PM in my opinion.

 

[Foxholer]

...
The discussion is not about wearing the mask, it is about why the measure has been deemed necessary now we seem to be at a much lower rate of infection, and consequently danger, but it wasn't deemed necessary when the virus was much more rampant? No-one can seem to provide a valid reason other than a bit of political point scoring

Well, when the 2m social distancing rules were in place - and so few were actually interacting, it made sense that that was 'sufficient'. Now that we are 'heading back to normal', it makes sense to insist on more stringent precautions - and shops are the logical place where increased vigilance/protection will be beneficial.

 

[Robster59]

I'll wear whatever safety equipment I deem appropriate to the task or which has been mandated for the task.

The discussion is not about wearing the mask, it is about why the measure has been deemed necessary now we seem to be at a much lower rate of infection, and consequently danger, but it wasn't deemed necessary when the virus was much more rampant? No-one can seem to provide a valid reason other than a bit of political point scoring

Perhaps because there are now more people out and about now. And if they did make face masks compulsory at an earlier date you would struggle to get them anyway.
Oh, and we have an incompetent PM who reacted too slowly and didn't take decisive action earlier. Much as I am not a fan of Nicola Sturgeon, she has been more decisive in this situation.

 

[KenL]

Perhaps because there are now more people out and about now. And if they did make face masks compulsory at an earlier date you would struggle to get them anyway.
Oh, and we have an incompetent PM who reacted too slowly and didn't take decisive action earlier. Much as I am not a fan of Nicola Sturgeon, she has been more decisive in this situation.

She has not done that great a job. Early on was a total car crash up here.

 

[Robster59]

She has not done that great a job. Early on was a total car crash up here.

It's comparative I think. I know what it's like up here I live up here .
I have to agree though that, especially if you look at the care homes, it's been a mess. I think her tactic is to wait a couple of weeks to see what happens in England before coming up with her next plan of action.

 

[GG26]

For those mentioning that face masks are not that great at stopping you getting he virus, the point of them is more to prevent the wearer from passing it on.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I'll wear whatever safety equipment I deem appropriate to the task or which has been mandated for the task.

The discussion is not about wearing the mask, it is about why the measure has been deemed necessary now we seem to be at a much lower rate of infection, and consequently danger, but it wasn't deemed necessary when the virus was much more rampant? No-one can seem to provide a valid reason other than a bit of political point scoring

To me it seems to be because the easing of lockdown measures has brought people , in some situations, in closer contact than when in lockdown.
Especially shops. One of my local supermarkets has now abandoned social distancing measures that they previously had in place. So now shoppers are much closer together as per pre Covid.
Public transport too brings people closer together.
So, if people are going to be closer together, then a mask will help alleviate the effects of breathing over each other.

 

[Robster59]

 

[Maninblack4612]

Easy in the winter, just pull the roll neck over your mouth & nose.

 

[GB72]

The rule I am applying is, if I am going inside I put the mask on. Going in a pro shop, mask on, going to the bathroom, mask on, going to place an order at the bar or pay a bill, mask on. Really not that complicated if you cut it down to the basic intention, outside, mask off, inside mask on.

 

[Jamesbrown]

Unless there’s a soirée of golfers in there browsing empty shelves or you intend on hugging the staff, just stay two metres away.

No need for a mask, unless you want to wear one, or have to wear one.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Off to Silvermere on Monday. Have a feeling it'll be busy so quite prepared to have a mask on regardless of it being non-compulsory. All about doing what feels right for me and protects me (and others) as best I can. Tempted to book a bay and hit some balls while I'm there but their bays are widely spaced so it wouldn't be a problem.