Petition: A Call for the Universal Use of Respirators in Healthcare (deadline October 31st)

[BrightCandle]

Comparing an ffp2/N95 to a gas mask is not a fair comparison. As @Sean Ive found masks that I find comfortable for all-day wear. I can understand this is not the case for all though.

Finding something comfortable and that seals well can require trying a number of options. Quite a lot of the half masks from 3M and other manufacturers are comfortable and tend to fit a wider range of people but to other people they look a lot more concerning and so they tend to be a lot less popular. But they are also more effective.

GVS do a relatively low profile half mask with the Elipse P100. 3M also do that is also lower profile than usual 3M 4251+. Both have a profile a bit more like a disposable but use cartridge filters which can be replaced and you can also potentially get other types of mask or filters, something that filters volatile organic compounds can aid with perfume for example.

 

[rvallee]

But it did need an education programme and a culture change. Same when motorcycle crash helmets were made mandatory.

Culture change is more effective than legislation because people do the policing themselves.

It definitely was enforcing the laws that made it happen. Same with smoking in public. Education mostly reinforces the behaviour of those who would follow the law to avoid the penalties anyway, but it definitely is the penalties that make the different, not the education. As people see violators, it encourages them to not bother. If violators are common enough, people simply give up. It's punishing the violators that shifts the culture.

Problem is when enforcement becomes too demanding. This is likely the main reason the profession balks at things like masks. They don't like being policed, and they definitely hate wearing respirators. They would absolutely need to be policed about it, they won't do it themselves, even to avoid killing their own patients.

Humans very rarely voluntarily change behaviour away from doing something harmful they are used to doing. Almost never happens, in fact. This is what made religion so important, it created the conditions for true self-enforcement, an internal punishment mechanism. Simply educating people almost never works. This was the basis of drug prohibition policy for decades, "just say no", and it was a disaster that actually backfired.

 

[Creekside]

It definitely was enforcing the laws that made it happen.

I agree with that. I didn't wear a seatbelt because I was worried about crashing (rare event); it was because I didn't want to get pulled over and fined (much more likely event). I encountered several "checking belt usage" police stops.

Since this thread is about the value of a letter to the government, why do governments put such laws in place? Is it from petitions, or from convincing studies that making it a law and enforcing it (which costs money) is cost-effective. I expect there were studies showing that making the seatbelt (or helmet, or second-hand smoke) law would save the economy $x billion/yr. I'm not sure the government really cares about individual lives that might be saved, but crash injuries, lung cancers, and LC can be measured in dollars (direct costs and loss of productivity).

If a restrictive law is unpopular (costs votes in the next election), the government has to do a good job of convincing voters why it's a worthwhile restriction. If a government is expecting to lose the next election, they might be more likely to pass some unpopular laws, hoping to benefit in future elections, where the anger has passed and the benefits had been accepted as real.

 

[Hutan]

Since this thread is about the value of a letter to the government, why do governments put such laws in place? Is it from petitions, or from convincing studies that making it a law and enforcing it (which costs money) is cost-effective. I expect there were studies showing that making the seatbelt (or helmet, or second-hand smoke) law would save the economy $x billion/yr. I'm not sure the government really cares about individual lives that might be saved, but crash injuries, lung cancers, and LC can be measured in dollars (direct costs and loss of productivity).

As you mention @Creekside, politicians always have an eye on what voters will respond favourably to. Public opinion is probably more often more important than evidence when new laws are made. And that is one reason why petitions can be useful - a demonstration that this is something people care about.

In this case, the letter was to WHO asking them to change their recommendations. So, the requested outcome is not a law, just a recommendation from an international authoritative source that could help to move how people think about masks.