Sweden stands out, soon the only country without oral protection requirements

Mouth guard or not? Hardly any other topic arouses so much sensation in the debate on fighting covid-19. As visible and with a direct effect on human comfort, they have become a symbol of the virus and the differences of opinion that exist about the best way to tackle it. The conflict extends within countries, between people and in the world of research. In Britain and Germany, thousands of people recently protested that mouth guards violate their fundamental rights. In Sweden, certain groups are pushing for Swedes to be forced to cover their faces in certain situations.

Reports that support one or another thesis is presented. The available science is interpreted in different ways. There is very little reliable research on its effects, some say. By what coincidence, the mere possibility that they can reduce the spread should be enough, say others.

It is clear that there are cultural differences. In China, where he was when covid-19 broke out, there was never any doubt. In one night, the street scene completely changed. Everyone suddenly wore a mouth guard and the one who was neglected was immediately informed.

For the Chinese and the inhabitants of many other Asian countries, mouth protection is a matter of course. They have experienced the viral diseases sars and mers and see the use of mouth guards as an act of solidarity that prevents the virus from spreading.

For most Asians, the mental step of putting something on their face is not very big. Many people wear mouth guards even when there is no pandemic. This can be to protect against air pollution. Or like in Japan, where it is rude to sneeze directly during hay fever season.

You now have the focus that oral protection has a global effect. Almost every country in the world has requirements or recommendations that the face should be covered in different situations. A starting shot for a change in attitude was when the WHO went from advocating solely for oral protection among healthcare professionals and avid patients to recommending it in places where social distance is difficult to maintain.

Now the trend is moving towards stricter rules. Mouth guards should be worn in various situations, in various places.

One example is France, where Prime Minister Jean Castex recently announced that there will be a requirement to wear masks throughout Paris, including outdoors. Castex got the message across in a way that immediately gained momentum among critics of the mouthguard. During the press conference, he constantly took his mask off and on, touched it, and occasionally hung it like an earring. A behavior that is believed to increase the risk of contracting the virus.

Italy and Germany also recently tightened the rules.

Sweden is increasingly lonely in the fact that so far it has not had any requirements for oral protection, despite the Public Health Agency on Tuesday closing the door with the message that they can be recommended when they have “value. “. As of Monday, there are also requirements for oral protection in public transport in New Zealand, which for a long time along with Sweden were among the exceptions.

– They limit the risk of covid-19 in situations where it is more difficult to maintain distance from people, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said when she gave the message.

Our Nordic neighbors have also gradually introduced requirements or recommendations for mouth protection in certain situations and probably have clearly higher user levels than can be seen in the graphs here, where the Nordic countries are only reported until June.

Also in the United StatesWhere the problem is political dynamite, the pendulum has swung toward more people in masks. Even President Donald Trump is now sometimes seen wearing a mouth guard, even though he was previously skeptical. Here, oral protection is a matter for the states and the vast majority have introduced some kind of requirement or recommendation. Now, more than 70 percent of Americans wear mouth guards, according to Yogov, which measures their use around the world. In Sweden, it is only about 5 percent. Sweden is only accompanied by Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Sudan and Greenland as it has no oral protection requirements.

Do they help then? It is clear that there is no clear connection between how strict the oral protection requirements are and how many have been infected. In Spain, where oral protection requirements are strict, the number of infections is increasing again. On the other hand, almost all mouth guards from day one in Taiwan used which managed to control the virus very well.

Everyone agrees that other factors come into play, such as testing and isolation of the sick. Most people also seem to agree that mouth guards should be viewed as an adjunct to other measures, such as keeping your distance, washing your hands, and isolating yourself when sick.

The strongest evidence is that mouth guards reduce the risk that a sick person will transmit the virus. But the sick should stay home, answer those who believe there is a superstition about mouth guards. Others point out that there are people who carry the virus without knowing it.

Another question it’s how good people are at wearing mouth guards. When I visited Italy, it was not uncommon to see the mouth guard on the chin, on the forehead or hanging along the cheek. The question is what profit they get then. At the same time, some researchers claim that mouth guards are a reminder not to touch your face and automatically create greater distance between people.

The debate is likely to continue until more countries consider they have as good control of the virus as China. A sign of the times is that while the rest of the world faces a heated debate over mouth protection, Beijing recently dropped the requirement for an outdoor mask. And when residents of Wuhan, where the virus broke out, recently had a huge pool party, mouth guards were conspicuous by their absence.