4 ms·

Can you post credible studies that masks don't work? Hint: there aren't any studies credible enough for professionals (doctors themselves) to believe them, hen

by tomp 6y ago

Can you post credible studies that masks don't work? Hint: there aren't any studies credible enough for professionals (doctors themselves) to believe them, hence they all wear masks these days (not just surgeons ostensibly "to protect the patients"). Edit: also, even if scientifically they might have been "correct" (no proven efficacy) the start of a pandemic is not the right time to start pretending medicine is a science and demanding a RCT for each procedure. Medicine was always closer to engineering ("we need results now") than science ("just let these people die until we have 5-sigma scientific proof the treatment works"). WHO made the wrong executive decision.

base698 6y ago
Doctors wear masks for other reasons like blood and other body fluid spatter. They aren't used to stop respiratory virus.
- tomp 6y ago
  All those are the same reasons between 2 years ago, when they were barely wearing any protection (except in surgery rooms) and now, when they're blowing almost biohazard-level protection (including masks and/or face shields). The only variable that has changed is a respiratory virus.
AlotOfReading 6y ago
Moreover, if people took a minute to think of how respiratory diseases spread, and what masks are, it'd be obvious that they have some level of efficacy.
incrudible 6y ago
Masks may be both somewhat effective at reducing spread while simultaneously increasing spread for other reasons. Suppose there was a virus that you're terrified of and there was no way to protect yourself. You would be reducing human contact to the absolute bare minimum. Now suppose people were told they could go about their business if they just put on masks. Simple cloth masks. Not proper KN95 masks, because those are rationed. People would go about their business as usual, with their cloth masks somewhat covering their faces. The stronger the message that "masks work", the more human contact there is, there more infections there are. Humans have trouble processing mixed messages, they want to think in binaries, they want to believe things are going to be fine if they follow the rules. I think the WHO had it right all along. They considered the all implications of mask usage, not just the physics of viral particles.
- yyyk 6y ago
  After seeing the behaviour of public health professionals during this pandemic, I have concluded that they know something about health but nothing about the public, and that they refuse to talk with people who actually are experts about the public. Your entire analysis is a guesstimate based on sociology/behavioural economics/anthropology/ and not medicine. WHO has no competence whatsoever to judge on that basis, and as far as I know they haven't consulted with anyone who does. If they had bothered to consult with actual experts, they'd tell them that humans can be communicated with if one picks the right words. Even now, in no place with a mask mandate has there been an increase in human contact. It turns out that the public can process some mixed messaging (and that diseases are really scary and that lockdowns reduce contact). Experts would probably file your analysis under 'elite panic'.
  - incrudible 6y ago
    > Your entire analysis is a guesstimate based on sociology/behavioural economics/anthropology/ and not medicine. The analysis that simple cloth masks "work" is a guesstimate based on physics and not medicine - or at least it was at the time. Absent scientific data, the best we can do is to use reason to effectively make a guess. > WHO has no competence whatsoever to judge on that basis, and as far as I know they haven't consulted with anyone who does. That sounds questionable, epidemiology certainly does have human behavior as a component of study. > If they had bothered to consult with actual experts, they'd tell them that humans can be communicated with if one picks the right words. I find the "appeal to anonymous experts" argument unconvincing. What kind of experts are we talking about? Communications experts? PR people? Isn't it their job to make you believe that communication is possible? To sell you a workshop on how to talk to people? Speaking from personal experience with at-risk individuals, it took a lot of effort to presumably convince people that simple cloth masks do not protect them. People are desperate to hear that a low-effort intervention will save them from peril. It's a strong confirmation bias effect. > Even now, in no place with a mask mandate has there been an increase in human contact. How would you be able to tell? What's your baseline? Even in areas without a mandate, people are free to wear masks or hold the belief that "my mask protects me".
unityByFreedom 6y ago
Here are several from a comment 2 years old, https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9qw3y0/do_countries_where_people_commonly_wear_face/e8cvqx6/ https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9qw3y0/do_count... And here is a meta analysis that suggests hand washing has a significantly protective effect, while wearing masks has a protective effect just not significant, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755436516300858?via%3Dihub&fbclid=IwAR2JlUuIHN7HPxlmrwj9rjHlgf0tOso0wIvv7TL8ial1wvIOCbigvyDVFqU https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175543651... Given that information it would make sense to broadly encourage hand washing over wearing masks. And that's exactly what the CDC did. Looking at the state of things now, I see far more messaging about wearing masks than washing hands, and I'm not convinced that this has been beneficial. OTOH, maybe we were screwed either way. Some people have been determined to ignore guidelines.
- tomp 6y ago
  Interesting, the study definitely goes against my priors re: respiratory pandemic. I still find it interesting, though, that in practice most experts (doctors, governments) do wear masks and/or encourage their use (some very recent "newcomers" as well - e.g. Switzerland and Sweden, who are only starting mask-wearing recommendations new). Are they denying settled science, or just being pragmatic (masks probably help, so even if it's not proven, doesn't hurt to wear them)? I think the emphasis on wearing masks is simply because that isn't the norm in the West. Washing hands is the norm (or rather, should be, we've all been hearing it since childhood...).
  - unityByFreedom 6y ago
    > Are they denying settled science, or just being pragmatic (masks probably help, so even if it's not proven, doesn't hurt to wear them)? Medical professionals wore them prior to this pandemic because they receive training on how to use them properly and they are well stocked where needed. Single use, only touch the strings, etc. They also know they are constantly in the presence of disease and risk transmitting it to those they are trying to help. In non-pandemic times there is a higher chance for an asymptomatic doctor or nurse to infect an at-risk patient than there is for an asymptomatic member of the general public to infect an at-risk person. > I think the emphasis on wearing masks is simply because that isn't the norm in the West. Washing hands is the norm (or rather, should be, we've all been hearing it since childhood...). I agree. The part that should be normal worldwide is that sick people should wear a mask to prevent transmission of any virus, pandemic or no pandemic. Hong Kong and Taiwan learned this during SARS and maintained the habit as part of their culture. They also wear them to filter air pollution. So, those two factors made it easy for them to accept masks for all in 2020. I don't think mask wearing for sick people was regular practice anywhere outside of medical professionals before 2002. And AFAIK it has not yet caught on everywhere even amidst this pandemic.

by tomp 6y ago

base698 6y ago

Doctors wear masks for other reasons like blood and other body fluid spatter. They aren't used to stop respiratory virus.

tomp 6y ago
All those are the same reasons between 2 years ago, when they were barely wearing any protection (except in surgery rooms) and now, when they're blowing almost biohazard-level protection (including masks and/or face shields). The only variable that has changed is a respiratory virus.

AlotOfReading 6y ago

Moreover, if people took a minute to think of how respiratory diseases spread, and what masks are, it'd be obvious that they have some level of efficacy.

incrudible 6y ago

Masks may be both somewhat effective at reducing spread while simultaneously increasing spread for other reasons. Suppose there was a virus that you're terrified of and there was no way to protect yourself. You would be reducing human contact to the absolute bare minimum. Now suppose people were told they could go about their business if they just put on masks. Simple cloth masks. Not proper KN95 masks, because those are rationed. People would go about their business as usual, with their cloth masks somewhat covering their faces. The stronger the message that "masks work", the more human contact there is, there more infections there are. Humans have trouble processing mixed messages, they want to think in binaries, they want to believe things are going to be fine if they follow the rules. I think the WHO had it right all along. They considered the all implications of mask usage, not just the physics of viral particles.

yyyk 6y ago
After seeing the behaviour of public health professionals during this pandemic, I have concluded that they know something about health but nothing about the public, and that they refuse to talk with people who actually are experts about the public. Your entire analysis is a guesstimate based on sociology/behavioural economics/anthropology/ and not medicine. WHO has no competence whatsoever to judge on that basis, and as far as I know they haven't consulted with anyone who does. If they had bothered to consult with actual experts, they'd tell them that humans can be communicated with if one picks the right words. Even now, in no place with a mask mandate has there been an increase in human contact. It turns out that the public can process some mixed messaging (and that diseases are really scary and that lockdowns reduce contact). Experts would probably file your analysis under 'elite panic'.
- incrudible 6y ago
  > Your entire analysis is a guesstimate based on sociology/behavioural economics/anthropology/ and not medicine. The analysis that simple cloth masks "work" is a guesstimate based on physics and not medicine - or at least it was at the time. Absent scientific data, the best we can do is to use reason to effectively make a guess. > WHO has no competence whatsoever to judge on that basis, and as far as I know they haven't consulted with anyone who does. That sounds questionable, epidemiology certainly does have human behavior as a component of study. > If they had bothered to consult with actual experts, they'd tell them that humans can be communicated with if one picks the right words. I find the "appeal to anonymous experts" argument unconvincing. What kind of experts are we talking about? Communications experts? PR people? Isn't it their job to make you believe that communication is possible? To sell you a workshop on how to talk to people? Speaking from personal experience with at-risk individuals, it took a lot of effort to presumably convince people that simple cloth masks do not protect them. People are desperate to hear that a low-effort intervention will save them from peril. It's a strong confirmation bias effect. > Even now, in no place with a mask mandate has there been an increase in human contact. How would you be able to tell? What's your baseline? Even in areas without a mandate, people are free to wear masks or hold the belief that "my mask protects me".

unityByFreedom 6y ago

Here are several from a comment 2 years old, https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9qw3y0/do_countries_where_people_commonly_wear_face/e8cvqx6/ https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/9qw3y0/do_count... And here is a meta analysis that suggests hand washing has a significantly protective effect, while wearing masks has a protective effect just not significant, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755436516300858?via%3Dihub&fbclid=IwAR2JlUuIHN7HPxlmrwj9rjHlgf0tOso0wIvv7TL8ial1wvIOCbigvyDVFqU https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175543651... Given that information it would make sense to broadly encourage hand washing over wearing masks. And that's exactly what the CDC did. Looking at the state of things now, I see far more messaging about wearing masks than washing hands, and I'm not convinced that this has been beneficial. OTOH, maybe we were screwed either way. Some people have been determined to ignore guidelines.

tomp 6y ago
Interesting, the study definitely goes against my priors re: respiratory pandemic. I still find it interesting, though, that in practice most experts (doctors, governments) do wear masks and/or encourage their use (some very recent "newcomers" as well - e.g. Switzerland and Sweden, who are only starting mask-wearing recommendations new). Are they denying settled science, or just being pragmatic (masks probably help, so even if it's not proven, doesn't hurt to wear them)? I think the emphasis on wearing masks is simply because that isn't the norm in the West. Washing hands is the norm (or rather, should be, we've all been hearing it since childhood...).
- unityByFreedom 6y ago
  > Are they denying settled science, or just being pragmatic (masks probably help, so even if it's not proven, doesn't hurt to wear them)? Medical professionals wore them prior to this pandemic because they receive training on how to use them properly and they are well stocked where needed. Single use, only touch the strings, etc. They also know they are constantly in the presence of disease and risk transmitting it to those they are trying to help. In non-pandemic times there is a higher chance for an asymptomatic doctor or nurse to infect an at-risk patient than there is for an asymptomatic member of the general public to infect an at-risk person. > I think the emphasis on wearing masks is simply because that isn't the norm in the West. Washing hands is the norm (or rather, should be, we've all been hearing it since childhood...). I agree. The part that should be normal worldwide is that sick people should wear a mask to prevent transmission of any virus, pandemic or no pandemic. Hong Kong and Taiwan learned this during SARS and maintained the habit as part of their culture. They also wear them to filter air pollution. So, those two factors made it easy for them to accept masks for all in 2020. I don't think mask wearing for sick people was regular practice anywhere outside of medical professionals before 2002. And AFAIK it has not yet caught on everywhere even amidst this pandemic.