Two new studies have just been published on how face coverings can help stop the spread of Covid-19. They are fascinating, and raise serious questions about UK government policy on this.

THREAD/

The first is a joint study by the Royal Academy and Royal Society - two of the UK’s leading scientific bodies. It finds - who knew - that face coverings are “effective in reducing source virus transmission” and help protect both the wearer and those aroud them.

Foreseeing this, it says, many countries made coverings a requirement in public from mid-March. This includes countries where use of masks was unusual. It worked: by the end of April, mask usage was 83% in Italy, 66% in the US and 64% in Spain. This will have saved many lives.

The story in the UK is very different. At the end of April the UK govt was still saying there was little evidence that masks worked. Coverings were not recommended, let alone made compulsory. As a result mask usage was just 25% at the end of April - much lower than elsewhere.

The advice changed in early May, when the government recommended coverings but said the evidence was weak and not strong enough to make masks mandatory. But less than a month later, it changed position again and made them compulsory on public transport and in hospitals.

The study says “consistent and effective public messaging is vital to public adherence”. Emphasis on “consistent”. It links “very low uptake” of masks in the UK to the “lack of clear recommendations to the general public”, plus inconsistent advice from organisations like WHO.

It also suggests the UK govt had an “over-reliance” on limited clinical trials on masks even though other “commons sense” policies like social distancing, quarantine and telling people to cough into their elbow were quickly adopted without any clinical trials supporting them.

The study concludes that even now, the current UK government position on face masks “does not align with the broader scientific advice in this report” and “seems to override the scientific advice and lack transparency in decision-making”.

The SECOND study is by scientists in Cambridge and Pennsylvania. It says “universal mask use” is “strongly supported” by scientific evidence and recommends them “in all circumstances” where distancing isn’t possible, including shops, offices and public settings.

It says the current UK government policy is “concerning” and that the scientific evidence “warrants urgent reconsideration of government policy on masks”. Masks should be made compulsory in all setting where distancing isn’t possible, it says.

President of the Royal Society, Venki Ramakrishnan: “The UK is way behind many countries in terms of wearing masks and clear policies and guidelines about mask wearing for the public...If guidance is inconsistent people will follow their own preferences.”

Asked about this, No10 says it has been “very clear” about the benefits of wearing masks where distancing isn’t possible and has made them compulsory in public transport and in hospitals. PM’s spokesman makes clear that coverings “should cover both the nose and mouth”.

- Ends -

PS. Links to the two papers here:

https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/set-c/set-c-facemasks.pdf?la=en-GB&hash=A22A87CB28F7D6AD9BD93BBCBFC2BB24

http://rs-delve.github.io/addenda/2020/07/07/masks-update.html