4 ms·

I can't really take anything seriously anymore: > Aerosols can accumulate, remain infectious in indoor air for hours I remember Michael Osterholm said CoV2 w

I can't really take anything seriously anymore: > Aerosols can accumulate, remain infectious in indoor air for hours I remember Michael Osterholm said CoV2 wasn't airborne, but respiratory, and he made the distinction airborne viruses stay in the air for hours (like Measles). "Aerosols" would indicate they mean respiratory but then they talk about it sticking around for hours. > silent shedders We are told there are asymptomatic people who spread the illness, but there is also tons of research to show they may not (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32405162/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32405162/) or that some of them weren't even asymptomatic; they had symptoms but no one asked (can't find that link). This whole pieces seems like a long article to say "wear a mask," but all of us see people who wear a mask incorrectly or wear a cloth mask that isn't very effective against viral matter (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342 https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342) and most people don't wash them daily, so they can build up moisture and bacteria (https://publichealth.uic.edu/news-stories/commentary-masks-for-all-for-covid-19-not-based-on-sound-data/ https://publichealth.uic.edu/news-stories/commentary-masks-f...). A lot of people treat them like a fashion accessory or just a thing they have to do and hang them up when they get home. When states mandate masks, you're no longer asking people, and you brake the social contract. A lot of people do it just so they aren't shamed. A lot of people who don't wear masks do it as a political statement. When you boil it down ... it's all either political or shame. There is a lot of explicit social conditioning and behavior modification going on here and it's sinister. I'm sick of pre-pubs that get contracted the following week and everyone going into hyper panic mode always. There are tons of secondary effects (people not going in for regular cancer screenings (https://unherd.com/thepost/professor-karol-sikora-fear-is-more-dangerous-than-the-virus/ https://unherd.com/thepost/professor-karol-sikora-fear-is-mo...), suicide attempts (https://archive.vn/N18t9 https://archive.vn/N18t9), heart conditions, etc.) that will catch up with us. I went into more detail earlier this month about getting fed up with our terrible information situation. This is not a time of honor: https://battlepenguin.com/politics/this-is-not-a-time-of-honor/ https://battlepenguin.com/politics/this-is-not-a-time-of-hon...

ylem 6y ago
I think one challenge is that pre-print servers are meant for scientists, not the public. Take physics. If I read a paper on the arxiv in my niche, I can evaluate it's quality. I often referee papers. For me, it's useful to get the early result and if there are gaps, then it's on me to catch them. For those working on Covid19, they are experts, writing for experts. Someone may put out a paper about aerosols in enclosed spaces and how they linger. Someone else might write about how this doesn't verify if the virus RNA detected indicates a live virus. This is how science works and you are seeing it at an accelerated pace. It's actually rather beautiful. But, if you are say a journalist and don't understand this, you can see an article and write a story about it, without understanding that it is preliminary. In short (too late for that), the problem is not that articles on pre-print servers disagree ad we learn more (that's also science)--it is failure of reporting to inform people that these are preliminary results and could be wrong.
longtimegoogler 6y ago
I am not sure the point of this rant. Anecdotally, it seems that countries where mask wearing is common are doing much better with respect to this virus. Particularly, in Asian countries where mask wearing is already a somewhat common occurrence in public during the winter months. Whether or not states should mandate masks is one question but businesses are entirely within their rights to require patrons to wear masks. Whether people wearing masks for the right reasons or the wrong reasons doesn't seem that relevant to me. Shame is a motivating factor in many behaviors. In short, wearing a mask is probably a good thing in the short term while we learn more about this virus.
- SeeTheTruth 6y ago
  Some people want to feel good about not wearing a mask, damn the consequences, damn the people hurt. If 80% of Americans wore masks infections would plummet https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infec... If people are too selfish to wear a mask I have no problem with a mandate.
timmytokyo 6y ago
I don't think the primary motivation for wearing masks is to protect yourself from others. It's to protect others from you. That's why there's shame involved in not wearing one; if you don't wear it, you're advertising that you don't care about the health of people around you. That's truly sinister. Unfortunately, something as innocuous as mask wearing has been politicized in the US by certain unsavory political and media figures. In more enlightened countries and cultures (see most of Asia), wearing masks in the midst of a pandemic is just common sense. America is broken.
- 0d9eooo 6y ago
  Unfortunately, I sympathize with the anti-mask requirement sentiment, even though I wear one in indoor public spaces like grocers. I don't think people should be shamed or that they should be mandated. When I read into it it's not always clear masks work well to limit egress of virus, and I do think the scientific community is to blame to some extent for presenting things as "masks are scientific and lack of masks is not." This approach might only worsen things relative to a message of "we don't really know but it's a good idea to be prudent." Linked scientific articles advocating masks I find are often misleading. They often are based on other viruses that potentially have other transmission properties, or make questionable assumptions, like that the mask is an n95 mask or is wet cloth. When I have found actual studies of SARS-CoV-2 with dry fabric of the sort most masks are made of, the masks work, but not nearly as well as you might think. The problems with masks have really been underscored for me practically too. I've tried a couple of masks now, fit to my face, and I've run into a telling problem: when I breathe in mildly colder air, my breath shoots out from underneath my mask and fogs my glasses immensely. Not only is it evident in a very visible way that when I'm wearing the mask it's not actually blocking airflow very well, but then I have to constantly adjust things because I can't see, and sometimes have to resort to removing the mask entirely. I still wear the mask and the fogging has gotten better as it's warmed, but my overall impression is that there are good reasons people might not wear masks, and I think the evidence in favor of them is much weaker and less rigorous than is often acknowledged. I think if the scientific community were being honest, they'd say they don't work great, but it's something, and every bit can count. That message seems to be enough; it would go a long way.

ylem 6y ago

I think one challenge is that pre-print servers are meant for scientists, not the public. Take physics. If I read a paper on the arxiv in my niche, I can evaluate it's quality. I often referee papers. For me, it's useful to get the early result and if there are gaps, then it's on me to catch them. For those working on Covid19, they are experts, writing for experts. Someone may put out a paper about aerosols in enclosed spaces and how they linger. Someone else might write about how this doesn't verify if the virus RNA detected indicates a live virus. This is how science works and you are seeing it at an accelerated pace. It's actually rather beautiful. But, if you are say a journalist and don't understand this, you can see an article and write a story about it, without understanding that it is preliminary. In short (too late for that), the problem is not that articles on pre-print servers disagree ad we learn more (that's also science)--it is failure of reporting to inform people that these are preliminary results and could be wrong.

longtimegoogler 6y ago

I am not sure the point of this rant. Anecdotally, it seems that countries where mask wearing is common are doing much better with respect to this virus. Particularly, in Asian countries where mask wearing is already a somewhat common occurrence in public during the winter months. Whether or not states should mandate masks is one question but businesses are entirely within their rights to require patrons to wear masks. Whether people wearing masks for the right reasons or the wrong reasons doesn't seem that relevant to me. Shame is a motivating factor in many behaviors. In short, wearing a mask is probably a good thing in the short term while we learn more about this virus.

SeeTheTruth 6y ago
Some people want to feel good about not wearing a mask, damn the consequences, damn the people hurt. If 80% of Americans wore masks infections would plummet https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infec... If people are too selfish to wear a mask I have no problem with a mandate.

timmytokyo 6y ago

I don't think the primary motivation for wearing masks is to protect yourself from others. It's to protect others from you. That's why there's shame involved in not wearing one; if you don't wear it, you're advertising that you don't care about the health of people around you. That's truly sinister. Unfortunately, something as innocuous as mask wearing has been politicized in the US by certain unsavory political and media figures. In more enlightened countries and cultures (see most of Asia), wearing masks in the midst of a pandemic is just common sense. America is broken.

0d9eooo 6y ago
Unfortunately, I sympathize with the anti-mask requirement sentiment, even though I wear one in indoor public spaces like grocers. I don't think people should be shamed or that they should be mandated. When I read into it it's not always clear masks work well to limit egress of virus, and I do think the scientific community is to blame to some extent for presenting things as "masks are scientific and lack of masks is not." This approach might only worsen things relative to a message of "we don't really know but it's a good idea to be prudent." Linked scientific articles advocating masks I find are often misleading. They often are based on other viruses that potentially have other transmission properties, or make questionable assumptions, like that the mask is an n95 mask or is wet cloth. When I have found actual studies of SARS-CoV-2 with dry fabric of the sort most masks are made of, the masks work, but not nearly as well as you might think. The problems with masks have really been underscored for me practically too. I've tried a couple of masks now, fit to my face, and I've run into a telling problem: when I breathe in mildly colder air, my breath shoots out from underneath my mask and fogs my glasses immensely. Not only is it evident in a very visible way that when I'm wearing the mask it's not actually blocking airflow very well, but then I have to constantly adjust things because I can't see, and sometimes have to resort to removing the mask entirely. I still wear the mask and the fogging has gotten better as it's warmed, but my overall impression is that there are good reasons people might not wear masks, and I think the evidence in favor of them is much weaker and less rigorous than is often acknowledged. I think if the scientific community were being honest, they'd say they don't work great, but it's something, and every bit can count. That message seems to be enough; it would go a long way.