3 ms·

Among 139 client exposed to the two infected stylists only 67 volunteered for testing. A) What if they were asymptomatic carriers? B) What about false-negative

Among 139 client exposed to the two infected stylists only 67 volunteered for testing. A) What if they were asymptomatic carriers? B) What about false-negatives? PCR testing work only after symptoms starts developing? C) Isn't this a rather small "sample" space to establish Universal Face Covering Policy? In this regard it'd be nice to have a countrywide comparison of infections ie. countries that required masking vs.that didn't.

snorrah 6y ago
As I understand it, asymptomatic carriers can still be tested and found positive just fine. It’s not the symptoms developing that lets you get a positive result, it’s the virus being found in the samples.
- Symmetry 6y ago
  Honestly viral load peaks most of a day before symptoms start so the people who show up best in a PCR test are going to be asymptomatic.
Tepix 6y ago
PCR tests work before symptoms develop.
zwirbl 6y ago
false negatives are more likely than false positives, which is one of the reasons people get tested multiple times if they have been exposed like the people mentioned in the article
CubsFan1060 6y ago
I think this is more of an observation than a strict study. Similar to this (preprint, not peer reviewed) https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20137745v3 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20137745v... However, the other argument is would be that a universal face covering policy has essentially zero negative other than "it's annoying". (Except for a very small percentage of people who actually have a real medical reason). So if we find out later that masks have no effect, we didn't exactly lose much.
- mumblemumble 6y ago
  My sense is that it's not even that it's annoying, it's that many people just really don't like to be told what to do. Or, to put it even less charitably, the USA is now the world COVID-19 hotspot because it turns out that "Give me liberty or give me death" is more than just a catchy slogan.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - umanwizard 6y ago
    What’s even uncharitable about that? I think a lot of Americans would agree with you. I for one will openly admit that I will accept X risk of death rather than Y affront to freedom. Of course, it depends on the magnitudes of X and Y. (On the other hand, claiming that this is why the US is currently the hotspot seems to be cherry-picking data: the first hotspot was China and the second was southwestern Europe, all places with very different cultures. But, even if we accept your hypothesis that the US has more cases because Americans are culturally more willing to accept a risk of death in exchange for more freedom than Chinese, French, Spanish or Italian people are, there’s nothing _wrong_ with that).
headmelted 6y ago
A) Yes? B) Maybe? C) No. "No" to the third one as common sense would indicate that covering your nose and mouth would slow the spread of a respiratory pathogen and the consequences are imbalanced. There are grave consequences to the virus spreading, and no consequences whatsoever to you covering your mouth. I didn't count discomfort or fashion as reasons to not wear a mask as that would be ridiculous.
- OldPenguin 6y ago
  I know, I'd rather wear a mask as a protection, potential "life-saving" measure than live in constant fear of catching the virus. And I have no discomfort in wearing such,nor it's a "fashion".SEA countries quickly adopted the policy because A)Government pressure B)Pollution-people wore masks before all this; maybe only time can tell whether it's a "good" protection. In my opinion.
Frost1x 6y ago
All and all, the data we have is still relatively new and mixed across the board. Because of obvious ethical considerations, in many cases, you can't create highly controlled studies and have to rely on retrospective data collection from situations with poor information, censored data, and a host of other issues. When you get a situation that resembles something you might create in a controlled study (like this hair shop mask situation), you latch on to see if you can find some insight. It may be poor data and a small sample but it can give guidance for how these highly complex macroscopic situations play out.
zucker42 6y ago
The usefulness of studies like this is they can be used to "update your priors" so to speak. Personally, I am slightly more confident in the efficacy of masks than I was before.

snorrah 6y ago

As I understand it, asymptomatic carriers can still be tested and found positive just fine. It’s not the symptoms developing that lets you get a positive result, it’s the virus being found in the samples.

Symmetry 6y ago
Honestly viral load peaks most of a day before symptoms start so the people who show up best in a PCR test are going to be asymptomatic.

Tepix 6y ago

PCR tests work before symptoms develop.

zwirbl 6y ago

false negatives are more likely than false positives, which is one of the reasons people get tested multiple times if they have been exposed like the people mentioned in the article

CubsFan1060 6y ago

I think this is more of an observation than a strict study. Similar to this (preprint, not peer reviewed) https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20137745v3 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.22.20137745v... However, the other argument is would be that a universal face covering policy has essentially zero negative other than "it's annoying". (Except for a very small percentage of people who actually have a real medical reason). So if we find out later that masks have no effect, we didn't exactly lose much.

mumblemumble 6y ago
My sense is that it's not even that it's annoying, it's that many people just really don't like to be told what to do. Or, to put it even less charitably, the USA is now the world COVID-19 hotspot because it turns out that "Give me liberty or give me death" is more than just a catchy slogan.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- umanwizard 6y ago
  What’s even uncharitable about that? I think a lot of Americans would agree with you. I for one will openly admit that I will accept X risk of death rather than Y affront to freedom. Of course, it depends on the magnitudes of X and Y. (On the other hand, claiming that this is why the US is currently the hotspot seems to be cherry-picking data: the first hotspot was China and the second was southwestern Europe, all places with very different cultures. But, even if we accept your hypothesis that the US has more cases because Americans are culturally more willing to accept a risk of death in exchange for more freedom than Chinese, French, Spanish or Italian people are, there’s nothing _wrong_ with that).

headmelted 6y ago

A) Yes? B) Maybe? C) No. "No" to the third one as common sense would indicate that covering your nose and mouth would slow the spread of a respiratory pathogen and the consequences are imbalanced. There are grave consequences to the virus spreading, and no consequences whatsoever to you covering your mouth. I didn't count discomfort or fashion as reasons to not wear a mask as that would be ridiculous.

OldPenguin 6y ago
I know, I'd rather wear a mask as a protection, potential "life-saving" measure than live in constant fear of catching the virus. And I have no discomfort in wearing such,nor it's a "fashion".SEA countries quickly adopted the policy because A)Government pressure B)Pollution-people wore masks before all this; maybe only time can tell whether it's a "good" protection. In my opinion.

Frost1x 6y ago

All and all, the data we have is still relatively new and mixed across the board. Because of obvious ethical considerations, in many cases, you can't create highly controlled studies and have to rely on retrospective data collection from situations with poor information, censored data, and a host of other issues. When you get a situation that resembles something you might create in a controlled study (like this hair shop mask situation), you latch on to see if you can find some insight. It may be poor data and a small sample but it can give guidance for how these highly complex macroscopic situations play out.

zucker42 6y ago

The usefulness of studies like this is they can be used to "update your priors" so to speak. Personally, I am slightly more confident in the efficacy of masks than I was before.