3 ms·
insofar as universal masking works, we should not be wearing masks. There's another factor in here that I don't see that you've weighed. Although this is far f
by CWuestefeld 6y ago
insofar as universal masking works, we should not be wearing masks.
There's another factor in here that I don't see that you've weighed. Although this is far from certain, I've seen some preliminary claims that the size of the initial viral exposure may be one of the factors that eventually determines the severity of a case. This makes intuitive sense - if you only get a small dose, your body has longer to notice the virus before it reaches a given threshold.
If this is true, then masks may still be worthwhile in order to keep a lid on the proportion of severe cases.
- __blockcipher__ 6y agoYes, I've seen the notion floated but never seen much evidence one way or the other. I wish people were less afraid about voluntary self-exposure, we could perform some really enlightening trials if the ethical go-ahead was given. (Personally, I would volunteer to be exposed to real SARS-CoV-2, but I would not volunteer to be on the receiving end of any vaccine candidates.) Anyway, it's dubious that masks do a great job in decreasing viral load, but I think this another case where if they do the effect size wouldn't be that great. Regardless, this really highlights how we're proposing universal measures for things that are not well researched. I like the approach Sweden has taken: if there's not strong evidence, we just don't do it. Simplifies so much.