3 ms·

More specifically this tweet then on 29th of February 2020: https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160 U.S. Surgeon General @Surgeon

by loopz 6y ago

More specifically this tweet then on 29th of February 2020: https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160 U.S. Surgeon General @Surgeon_General 29th Feb. Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk! http://bit.ly/37Ay6Cm But wasn't this appropriate for that situation and time? If there were oversupply, sure, and enough time to train the public, and maybe some evidence that masks are not detrimental to contagion for untrained people. There's also a huge difference between a highly contagious situation, and one after physical distancing have halted the spread. You would want the real masks used where appropriate. What is surely to happen after this debacle though, is that many official recommendations and plans will have to account for pandemic outbreaks and remedy many of the shortcomings of current funding cuts.

gridlockd 6y ago
> "They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus" This is true. Masks don't protect you from catching COVID-19. Masks may lower (but not eliminate) spread of virus particles. We don't have any evidence that this reduces infection rate, but it's plausible, at least for droplets. If the virus spreads mostly by aerosol however, then mandated masks are probably counterproductive, because if the government says "wear masks" the people will hear "wear masks and you'll be fine", because that is what they want to hear. All you smart rational types out there might not think like that, but I have heard this reasoning first hand from ordinary people. It's a real problem.
- cameldrv 6y ago
  Masks protect both directions. Some masks protect better than others. If masks don't protect you from getting COVID, why do healthcare workers wear them, and why should we reserve for them a product that doesn't work? I understand wanting there to be enough for HCWs. If so, say that without the lie. If there aren't enough for HCWs, restrict purchase by the general public and say that they will be available to the general public when there are adequate supplies. When the health authorities lie to the public, they lose credibility, and they need that credibility if they're going to ask people to do extreme things like not leave their houses for an extended period of time. It's really just like a condom. They work, some better than others, but none are perfect. The general public can understand that.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    > Masks protect both directions. Cite me some evidence that shows that simple (non-FFP) masks or surgical masks protect the wearer against any virus. To the best of my knowledge, There isn't any such evidence and it's not scientifically plausible that they would protect. > If masks don't protect you from getting COVID, why do healthcare workers wear them, and why should we reserve for them a product that doesn't work? Because healthcare workers do get infected (a lot) and you don't want them to spread the virus (or other pathogens) around either. We also need to differentiate between FFP masks which may offer some protection against viruses and surgical masks, which do not. It is mainly the FFP masks that are in short supply. > When the health authorities lie to the public, they lose credibility, and they need that credibility if they're going to ask people to do extreme things like not leave their houses for an extended period of time. Maybe, but that statement I quoted is strictly not a lie. > It's really just like a condom. No, it isn't, not even close. It's like avoiding pregnancy by wrapping your dick in a piece of linen. It just doesn't work. There's no evidence that it works. It's not plausible that it would work. > The general public can understand that. You, presumably intelligent and well-educated, don't even understand it. You still believe the mask protects the wearer when it does not. I have no hopes the general public will understand it. To be clear, I'm not against wearing masks because I hope that it can reduce droplet infections and it's a net benefit. That's just my hope though, not my firmly-held belief.
    - cameldrv 6y ago
      Sure, here's a Cochrane review that shows the opposite of what you say. Have you looked at the scientific literature on this? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190272/pdf/bmj-336-7635-res-00077-el.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190272/pdf/bmj... Even a surgical mask provides protection to the wearer. A professional-grade surgical mask provides N95 level filtration, it just doesn't seal to the face like an N95. That means that some of the air coming in will not be filtered. However, much of it is, and larger, non aerosolized ballistic droplets will be stopped and absorbed by a mask.
      - gridlockd 6y ago

by loopz 6y ago

gridlockd 6y ago

> "They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus" This is true. Masks don't protect you from catching COVID-19. Masks may lower (but not eliminate) spread of virus particles. We don't have any evidence that this reduces infection rate, but it's plausible, at least for droplets. If the virus spreads mostly by aerosol however, then mandated masks are probably counterproductive, because if the government says "wear masks" the people will hear "wear masks and you'll be fine", because that is what they want to hear. All you smart rational types out there might not think like that, but I have heard this reasoning first hand from ordinary people. It's a real problem.

cameldrv 6y ago
Masks protect both directions. Some masks protect better than others. If masks don't protect you from getting COVID, why do healthcare workers wear them, and why should we reserve for them a product that doesn't work? I understand wanting there to be enough for HCWs. If so, say that without the lie. If there aren't enough for HCWs, restrict purchase by the general public and say that they will be available to the general public when there are adequate supplies. When the health authorities lie to the public, they lose credibility, and they need that credibility if they're going to ask people to do extreme things like not leave their houses for an extended period of time. It's really just like a condom. They work, some better than others, but none are perfect. The general public can understand that.
- gridlockd 6y ago
  > Masks protect both directions. Cite me some evidence that shows that simple (non-FFP) masks or surgical masks protect the wearer against any virus. To the best of my knowledge, There isn't any such evidence and it's not scientifically plausible that they would protect. > If masks don't protect you from getting COVID, why do healthcare workers wear them, and why should we reserve for them a product that doesn't work? Because healthcare workers do get infected (a lot) and you don't want them to spread the virus (or other pathogens) around either. We also need to differentiate between FFP masks which may offer some protection against viruses and surgical masks, which do not. It is mainly the FFP masks that are in short supply. > When the health authorities lie to the public, they lose credibility, and they need that credibility if they're going to ask people to do extreme things like not leave their houses for an extended period of time. Maybe, but that statement I quoted is strictly not a lie. > It's really just like a condom. No, it isn't, not even close. It's like avoiding pregnancy by wrapping your dick in a piece of linen. It just doesn't work. There's no evidence that it works. It's not plausible that it would work. > The general public can understand that. You, presumably intelligent and well-educated, don't even understand it. You still believe the mask protects the wearer when it does not. I have no hopes the general public will understand it. To be clear, I'm not against wearing masks because I hope that it can reduce droplet infections and it's a net benefit. That's just my hope though, not my firmly-held belief.
  - cameldrv 6y ago
    Sure, here's a Cochrane review that shows the opposite of what you say. Have you looked at the scientific literature on this? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190272/pdf/bmj-336-7635-res-00077-el.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190272/pdf/bmj... Even a surgical mask provides protection to the wearer. A professional-grade surgical mask provides N95 level filtration, it just doesn't seal to the face like an N95. That means that some of the air coming in will not be filtered. However, much of it is, and larger, non aerosolized ballistic droplets will be stopped and absorbed by a mask.
    - gridlockd 6y ago