I saw a tweet yesterday by someone, can't remember who, sorry, who said that though a face mask sceptic we shouldn't assume that face masks have caused a rise in cases despite rising cases after they were made mandatory. Obviously there are plenty of other reasons, BUT it is a

perfectly legitimate question to ask if mandatory face coverings really do have the effect they are supposed to, or whether there might be other problems with them that haven't been recognised.

One in particular is messaging. Saying you must stay home and isolate, if you are

infected, or have come into contact with someone who is, while at the same time saying you must wear a face mask when you go to a shop in case you are infected does somewhat undermine the "you must stay at home and self isolate" message. Why would someone stay at home when there

are apparently all these potentially infected people walking around shops wearing face masks? why should someone self isolate if the risk of infecting someone else can be removed by wearing a face mask?

There is a massive problem with messaging here. Either you should self

isolate at home if you suspect you are infected or you can pop down the shops wearing a face mask, because that's how you save lives.

Questions do need to be asked about whether there is a negative effect of face masks, given the rise in cases after their introduction. There

are other questions like more touching of faces because of them, risk of contamination, wearing them too long, and people thinking they're a substitute for social distancing.

But to NOT ask those questions when cases rose after their introduction is negligent.