4 ms·
On the one hand, this is a fair question. On the other hand, isn't it blindingly obvious, what the condition will be? Essentials, most countries are trying to
by pintxo 6y ago
On the one hand, this is a fair question. On the other hand, isn't it blindingly obvious, what the condition will be?
Essentials, most countries are trying to flatten the curve [1]. Mandating masks is one layer of a swiss cheese [2] security model to try to keep the curve as flat as needed to prevent overloading of the health care systems.
Isn't it obvious we will need to follow the mask mandate as long as there is a risk that the curve crosses the capacity of our health care systems?
Leaving us with essentially four possible reasons why we can stop wearing masks:
a) We reach sufficient immunity through vaccination
b) We have successfully eradicated the virus
c) We have a cure for the infection
d) Everyone (epidemiologically speaking, so a relevant proportion of the population) has had the virus and we have developed sufficient immunity through exposure
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flattening_the_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flattening_the_curve
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model
- clairity 6y agomasks were never necessary for the masses, as opposed to care workers and others who deal with the public in the course of their work. they're very marginal for common interaction scenarios we see day-to-day, but a huge political distraction keeping us from honing in on the main sensible measure we need to "flatten the curve", which is reasonable distancing at private social gatherings, not any of the additional political noise of mask-wearing outside for signaling or social pressure, and limiting certain businesses from operating but not others. mask mandates were only essential for politicians to show that they were tackling the problem, not to actually reduce infection rates.
- pintxo 6y agoObviously distancing is the best possible option we have right now. If we could perfectly distance from each other for 2 weeks, we would eradicate the virus altogether. Unfortunately, this is not feasible, if we also want to maintain society as is. Don't you think that masks can be a useful tools in cases where keeping distance is not possible?
- clairity 6y agoyes, the policy all along should have been to only wear masks at social gatherings where distancing isn't guaranteeable (along with previously-noted public-facing workers). the fatigue of wearing a mask all the time (for complicity or social pressure) encourages us to take them off in private, exactly where they might have actual marginal benefit.
- pintxo 6y agoJust published study on mask efficiency: https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/5.0029767 https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/5.0029767
- clairity 6y agothat’s a paper on a fluid dynamical model of how masks might work, and the theoretical filtration rates of the model. they didn’t test mask efficiency against covid. it’s a neat application of navier-stokes and computational fluid dynamics, but not too relevant to mask effectiveness and public health policy in real-world applications.