Several netizens chided President Duterte’s face shield policy which he and his staff are not following.
Following Malacañang’s flip-flopping statements regarding the use of face shields–during President Duterte’s latest public address, he decided to continue the practice of wearing face shields in both public and private areas.
The announcement, however, was done by him in Malacañang with some cabinet members not wearing face shields.
It made several netizens questioned Duterte’s decision given the fact that they are not following it.
In his tweet, journalist and activist Tonyo Cruz shared a photo of the President during the meeting and asked, “Why is he not wearing face shields indoors, a policy which he requires.”
Why is he not wearing face shields indoors, a policy which he requires https://t.co/JJbIAqv2br
— Tonyo Cruz (@tonyocruz) June 21, 2021
Another journalist Barnaby Lo also shared the same observation saying those who decided to require people to wear face shields were the ones who are violating it.
“The people who decided we must wear face shields… WERE NOT WEARING FACE SHIELDS… when they made/announced the decision.”
The people who decided we must wear face shields… WERE NOT WEARING FACE SHIELDS… when they made/announced the decision.
📷: Malacañang pic.twitter.com/l8i9Mc4aUp
— Barnaby Lo 吳宗鴻 (@barnabychuck) June 21, 2021
Netizen @leilaPilipinas meanwhile blasted the Government for making policies that they violate themselves.
Tapos sila sila din ang violator! 🤭🥴 pic.twitter.com/UBsOtHN6tr
— leila lopez (@leilaPilipinas) June 21, 2021
BREAKING: President Rodrigo Duterte says wearing of face shields still required both outdoors and indoors upon advice of health experts and in light of the Delta variant.
*literal yung BREAKING, ampots🤦♂️ pic.twitter.com/uSNGMIa5rY
— kiss me under diwata twilight💋 (@dailyjayvz) June 21, 2021
Meanwhile, other netizens questioned IATF’s basis in requiring people to wear face shields.
Netizens slammed the so-called international study about the benefits of face shields using a small data sampling.
https://twitter.com/ohitsmiko/status/1406989433501454338
https://twitter.com/ohitsmiko/status/1407009226740830209
Re: face shields
As a researcher who simulate wind flows, I am puzzled with the insistence on face shields.
Face shields causes intake of air to the regions beneath the shield to induce higher negative pressures.
Higher negative pressure, higher particulate transport.
— Joshua C. Agar (@JoshuaCAgar) June 22, 2021
N = 62, all healthcare workers. No control, no and intervention both in single cohort. How can one derive causation?
Putting “international studies” in the heading does not add legitimacy to an obviously flawed, uhh, “trial.” 😑 https://t.co/20vlzsI2na
— orjy (@orjyyyyy) June 21, 2021
So 62 HCWs did not wear face shields… 12 got infected in a week… meaning 50 did not get infected?? then they introduced face shields to the 50 and no one got infected??
How does this protocol even make sense? https://t.co/wSApWROCe0
— Leslie Faye Cando (@lesliefayecando) June 21, 2021
In a group of 62 HCWs, 12 got infected. The remaining 50 go back to work with face shields and stay uninfected. Galing no, lumipat sila from control to experimental group. What’s the intervention: face shield, o di kaya natakot sila after 12 colleagues got covid? 🤷🏽♂️ https://t.co/zky0fGB5xX
— Josh (@josh_danac) June 21, 2021
One netizen even stressed that face shields just contributed to the additional waste in our environment as billions got discarded daily.
https://twitter.com/ohitsmiko/status/1406992518336565248
The face shield is the epitome of the govt pandemic response: flimsy, useless, a big waste of resources. Give us real scientific solutions: mass testing & contact tracing, more genomic surveillance, improved ventilation, better mask guidance, economic aid, WFH/flexible hours. https://t.co/I1X0KPtn0A
— Josh (@josh_danac) June 21, 2021
