11 ms·

> Remember what the official word was for all too long: masks don't work, but save them for health workers. Who said masks don't work? What I recall people say

> Remember what the official word was for all too long: masks don't work, but save them for health workers. Who said masks don't work? What I recall people saying is: * most masks provide marginal protection to the wearer * the masks that provide effective protection should be saved for those in situations where they need them (and can be knowledgeably used) * most people probably don't need those masks There's a worthwhile criticism in noting some seem to have taken longer to get on board with the idea that marginally effective masks (a) reduce spread and (b) are a low-cost intervention, but people who are going to make that criticism probably should doing it from a standpoint where they're asking themselves why they flattened the above multi-point conception into "masks don't work." And if this is all about using the initial misunderstanding as a jumping off point to the difficulty of getting non-trivial information out to the public, that actually underscores the importance of curation. > Does no one read history or think about second order effects? Are you suggesting that this is the milestone of history where someone decided not to publish or distribute material because they thought it was irresponsible? Because I'd bet that's happened before, even inside societies that cultivate robust discourse. Maybe even a lot. Who is thinking about the second order effects of a no-responsibility no-curation approach?

dahdum 6y ago
Asymptomatic spread was confirmed as significant the end of Feb when they tested the cruise passengers, and most of Asia already had some form of mandatory mask order in place. Widespread mask usage was shown in at least a few NIH studies to reduce transmission, though most looked at getting a virus versus transmitting it IIRC. To me it looks like CDC/WHO hubris caused them to completely disregard Asia's approach until they could "discover" it themselves.
ceejayoz 6y ago
The US Surgeon General: https://twitter.com/surgeon_general/status/1233725785283932160 https://twitter.com/surgeon_general/status/12337257852839321... "Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus..."
- wwweston 6y ago
  This is an instance of what I described in my above comment. "STOP BUYING MASKS" is not "Masks don't work," especially given the rest of the context of the statement where he's saying they're important to protect high-exposure roles healthcare providers. Which means he's also saying they work. "They are not effective in preventing the general public" might be reasonably interpreted as "masks don't work", but given that he's clearly saying they work in the same breath, it's a better bet that he means something else.
  - jdc 6y ago
    Your first paragraph is a blatant strawman on the argument presented here in the comments.
  - nonbirithm 6y ago
    The problem is not all people in the public at large will apply that same logic and just take the statement at face value at first glance. Masks don't work. Don't buy masks. When you ask them the question of "what did they initially tell you" later, their response would be "masks don't work." With someone in such an official position, misinformation can do great harm for people that know no better. Anyone who doesn't do their own research might think they're supposed to trust these people when worst comes to worst. And when they find out the advice is contradictory, that trust is lost, and might not be rebuilt for a very long time. It breeds doubt. Personally however, I couldn't for the life of me believe that having no mask is better than having one.
    - wwweston 6y ago
      Totally on board with criticism of how effectively (or not) the tweet communicates key ideas. There's some hazards, and we could reasonably expect that people who are appointed to provide clear public leadership would be better at that job. But that reinforces the importance of well-curated communication, which is the context for this discussion, where apparently some are criticizing Amazon for refusing to release communication that is not only not-well expressed, as the tweet arguably is, but is actively disinformative to delusional.
darawk 6y ago
The CDC and WHO both at various times recommended against the general public wearing masks. https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/4/13/21214114/media-coronavirus-pandemic-coverage-cdc-should-you-wear-masks https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/4/13/21214114/media-coronavi... This advice was wrong. It is not just sick people that benefit from wearing masks. It is not true that people are flattening that into "masks don't work". Masks don't work was repeated many, many times by these organizations. Here's an example: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commenta... https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-recommendation-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-r... https://www.businessinsider.com/who-no-need-for-healthy-people-to-wear-face-masks-2020-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/who-no-need-for-healthy-peop... Let's not practice revisionist history here. These organizations were dead wrong, and it had severe consequences for the spread of infection.
- ianai 6y ago
  The best I heard it explained as was a dilemma. Do you tell people that only n95 masks or better work to protect the wearer? If you do then, because enough stockpile of n95 masks wasn’t maintained for this pandemic, critical medical practitioners like ER staff, nurses, doctors, surgeons wouldn’t be able to wear PPE. Or Do you lie and tell people n95 masks don’t work in the hopes essential medical personnel are then able to find masks? I think they went with the later. I think this was discussed by Michael O. during his appearance on JRE.
  - msandford 6y ago
    Dilemma or not lying erodes trust. Was it worth it? Probably not is what a lot of people are saying.
    - HideousKojima 6y ago
      It also ignores a third option (and one that was actually used anyways), blocking all shipments of n95 masks to retail outlets to send to hospitals instead
clairity 6y ago
> "Who said masks don't work? What I recall people saying is: > * most masks provide marginal protection to the wearer > * the masks that provide effective protection should be saved for those in situations where they need them (and can be knowledgeably used) > * most people probably don't need those masks" yup, moreover, masks are marginal on top of other measures, most notably distancing. masks can make a difference if you're in a situation where you can't distance when face-to-face in proximity of strangers for more than a short time. distancing requires less "expertise" and cognizance as well, so is a better principal measure all around. that's a more nuanced message than "masks don't work". the opposing "wear masks at all times" is similarly dogmatic and incorrect.
- ksdale 6y ago
  It may be similarly dogmatic, but there are degrees of correctness, and a world where everyone wears masks all the time is one with with much less coronavirus than one where no one except medical professionals wear them.
  - clairity 6y ago
    thank you for demonstrating the exact illusion of safety that's so pervasive around mask-wearing. no, masks are marginal, that's the point, they work at the margins. it's the distancing that's doing the work of "much less coronavirus". for your statement to be relatively true, we'd need to live in a world with no lockdowns and no distancing.
    - pythonaut_16 6y ago
      Do you have a source for your claim that masks are less impactful than distancing?
      - DanBC 6y ago
        https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... > The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. This is clear: physical distance definitely works. Optimal use of masks might work -- that's all they can say, and they need better evidence.
TallGuyShort 6y ago
The US Surgeon General said "You can increase your risk of getting it by wearing a mask if you are not a health care provider" [1]. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/health/surgeon-general-coronavirus-masks-risk-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/health/surgeon-general-corona...
JPKab 6y ago
Something that I think is important about the concept of free speech is that journalists and authors shouldn't be attempting to worry about the first and second order effects of their writings. They can't possibly correctly predict them, because people can't predict the future. Just take all of your thoughts on digital books on Kindle, switch them to a collection of physical publishers who have a monopoly on printing presses, and ask yourself if you still think it's ok. What if it's your opinion next time that is censored? An Australian doctor discovered (about 20 years ago I believe) that a species of bacterium played a huge role in peptic ulcers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Marshall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Marshall He was censored, shunned from the medical establishment, and laughed at for years. He was correct. Why do you place so much blind faith in these institutions to a point where you just KNOW it will never be you being censored? Are you a uniquely enlightened human being who has never had an idea that the majority of the people in the room completely disagreed with? The medical establishment was censoring Barry Marshall because they were worried about the first and second order effects of people trying to treat ulcers with antibiotics. It was dangerous, they said. How long before the guns get turned on you, me, or others?
- StuntPope 6y ago
  Well said. Let's not forget Ignaz Semmelweiss, who make the outlandish claim that surgical and childbirth mortalities would decrease if surgeons washed their hands between procedures. The reason why was because he declared there existed something called "bacteria", invisible to the eye, which was infecting patients and killing them. He was ridiculed (#fakenews!), stripped of his professional degrees, LOCKED IN AN INSANE ASYLUM and eventually, beaten to death by guards. Well, turned out, ole Semmelweiss was onto something. Who knew?
ping_pong 6y ago
You are being a revisionist. The Surgeon General himself said that masks don't work. https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160 https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/12337257852839321... 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!

dahdum 6y ago

Asymptomatic spread was confirmed as significant the end of Feb when they tested the cruise passengers, and most of Asia already had some form of mandatory mask order in place. Widespread mask usage was shown in at least a few NIH studies to reduce transmission, though most looked at getting a virus versus transmitting it IIRC. To me it looks like CDC/WHO hubris caused them to completely disregard Asia's approach until they could "discover" it themselves.

ceejayoz 6y ago

The US Surgeon General: https://twitter.com/surgeon_general/status/1233725785283932160 https://twitter.com/surgeon_general/status/12337257852839321... "Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus..."

wwweston 6y ago
This is an instance of what I described in my above comment. "STOP BUYING MASKS" is not "Masks don't work," especially given the rest of the context of the statement where he's saying they're important to protect high-exposure roles healthcare providers. Which means he's also saying they work. "They are not effective in preventing the general public" might be reasonably interpreted as "masks don't work", but given that he's clearly saying they work in the same breath, it's a better bet that he means something else.
- jdc 6y ago
  Your first paragraph is a blatant strawman on the argument presented here in the comments.
- nonbirithm 6y ago
  The problem is not all people in the public at large will apply that same logic and just take the statement at face value at first glance. Masks don't work. Don't buy masks. When you ask them the question of "what did they initially tell you" later, their response would be "masks don't work." With someone in such an official position, misinformation can do great harm for people that know no better. Anyone who doesn't do their own research might think they're supposed to trust these people when worst comes to worst. And when they find out the advice is contradictory, that trust is lost, and might not be rebuilt for a very long time. It breeds doubt. Personally however, I couldn't for the life of me believe that having no mask is better than having one.
  - wwweston 6y ago
    Totally on board with criticism of how effectively (or not) the tweet communicates key ideas. There's some hazards, and we could reasonably expect that people who are appointed to provide clear public leadership would be better at that job. But that reinforces the importance of well-curated communication, which is the context for this discussion, where apparently some are criticizing Amazon for refusing to release communication that is not only not-well expressed, as the tweet arguably is, but is actively disinformative to delusional.

darawk 6y ago

The CDC and WHO both at various times recommended against the general public wearing masks. https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/4/13/21214114/media-coronavirus-pandemic-coverage-cdc-should-you-wear-masks https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/4/13/21214114/media-coronavi... This advice was wrong. It is not just sick people that benefit from wearing masks. It is not true that people are flattening that into "masks don't work". Masks don't work was repeated many, many times by these organizations. Here's an example: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commenta... https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-recommendation-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-r... https://www.businessinsider.com/who-no-need-for-healthy-people-to-wear-face-masks-2020-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/who-no-need-for-healthy-peop... Let's not practice revisionist history here. These organizations were dead wrong, and it had severe consequences for the spread of infection.

ianai 6y ago
The best I heard it explained as was a dilemma. Do you tell people that only n95 masks or better work to protect the wearer? If you do then, because enough stockpile of n95 masks wasn’t maintained for this pandemic, critical medical practitioners like ER staff, nurses, doctors, surgeons wouldn’t be able to wear PPE. Or Do you lie and tell people n95 masks don’t work in the hopes essential medical personnel are then able to find masks? I think they went with the later. I think this was discussed by Michael O. during his appearance on JRE.
- msandford 6y ago
  Dilemma or not lying erodes trust. Was it worth it? Probably not is what a lot of people are saying.
  - HideousKojima 6y ago
    It also ignores a third option (and one that was actually used anyways), blocking all shipments of n95 masks to retail outlets to send to hospitals instead

clairity 6y ago

> "Who said masks don't work? What I recall people saying is: > * most masks provide marginal protection to the wearer > * the masks that provide effective protection should be saved for those in situations where they need them (and can be knowledgeably used) > * most people probably don't need those masks" yup, moreover, masks are marginal on top of other measures, most notably distancing. masks can make a difference if you're in a situation where you can't distance when face-to-face in proximity of strangers for more than a short time. distancing requires less "expertise" and cognizance as well, so is a better principal measure all around. that's a more nuanced message than "masks don't work". the opposing "wear masks at all times" is similarly dogmatic and incorrect.

ksdale 6y ago
It may be similarly dogmatic, but there are degrees of correctness, and a world where everyone wears masks all the time is one with with much less coronavirus than one where no one except medical professionals wear them.
- clairity 6y ago
  thank you for demonstrating the exact illusion of safety that's so pervasive around mask-wearing. no, masks are marginal, that's the point, they work at the margins. it's the distancing that's doing the work of "much less coronavirus". for your statement to be relatively true, we'd need to live in a world with no lockdowns and no distancing.
  - pythonaut_16 6y ago
    Do you have a source for your claim that masks are less impactful than distancing?
    - DanBC 6y ago
      https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... > The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance. This is clear: physical distance definitely works. Optimal use of masks might work -- that's all they can say, and they need better evidence.

TallGuyShort 6y ago

The US Surgeon General said "You can increase your risk of getting it by wearing a mask if you are not a health care provider" [1]. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/health/surgeon-general-coronavirus-masks-risk-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/health/surgeon-general-corona...

JPKab 6y ago

Something that I think is important about the concept of free speech is that journalists and authors shouldn't be attempting to worry about the first and second order effects of their writings. They can't possibly correctly predict them, because people can't predict the future. Just take all of your thoughts on digital books on Kindle, switch them to a collection of physical publishers who have a monopoly on printing presses, and ask yourself if you still think it's ok. What if it's your opinion next time that is censored? An Australian doctor discovered (about 20 years ago I believe) that a species of bacterium played a huge role in peptic ulcers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Marshall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Marshall He was censored, shunned from the medical establishment, and laughed at for years. He was correct. Why do you place so much blind faith in these institutions to a point where you just KNOW it will never be you being censored? Are you a uniquely enlightened human being who has never had an idea that the majority of the people in the room completely disagreed with? The medical establishment was censoring Barry Marshall because they were worried about the first and second order effects of people trying to treat ulcers with antibiotics. It was dangerous, they said. How long before the guns get turned on you, me, or others?

StuntPope 6y ago
Well said. Let's not forget Ignaz Semmelweiss, who make the outlandish claim that surgical and childbirth mortalities would decrease if surgeons washed their hands between procedures. The reason why was because he declared there existed something called "bacteria", invisible to the eye, which was infecting patients and killing them. He was ridiculed (#fakenews!), stripped of his professional degrees, LOCKED IN AN INSANE ASYLUM and eventually, beaten to death by guards. Well, turned out, ole Semmelweiss was onto something. Who knew?

ping_pong 6y ago

You are being a revisionist. The Surgeon General himself said that masks don't work. https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160 https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/12337257852839321... 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!