4 ms·
I can’t really imagine a mechanism by which a mask would still let the same cloud of particles from a cough disperse in exactly the same way, but uniformly remo
by cactus2093 6y ago
I can’t really imagine a mechanism by which a mask would still let the same cloud of particles from a cough disperse in exactly the same way, but uniformly remove 70% of them. Surely if it is blocking that many particles it’s also disrupting the spread of the remaining particles. Or it could very well be the opposite of what you’re saying, maybe blocking that 70% of particles is enough to stop even more than 70% of the transmission opportunities. That wouldn’t be crazy if the spread is mostly via large droplets (most likely to get stopped by a mask) rather than aerosolized particles, which has been suggested.
I think your argument is that it’s just not scientifically proven, but we have to make decisions today with the best information we have. Wearing masks still appears to be a good idea, has very low cost, and has been shown to help for a long time for all kinds of respiratory diseases.
- gns24 6y agoI don't disagree that wearing masks seems a good idea, I'm just saying 70% reduction in particles doesn't map to a 70% reduction in transmissions. Whether the reduction is 10% or 90%, it's a useful contribution, particularly because in public situations where masks are likely to be recommended (transport, shops) if someone coughs as you're walking past there's no way for contact tracers to know about that link.