4 ms·
>It would be interesting to have a trial where everyone was wearing N95s, but we're not likely to see that. Bavaria and Austria had FFP2/KN95 only while the re
by carlmr 5y ago
>It would be interesting to have a trial where everyone was wearing N95s, but we're not likely to see that.
Bavaria and Austria had FFP2/KN95 only while the rest of Germany had the choice of surgical masks or FFP2, where almost everybody picked surgical masks (cheaper, not as annoying to wear).
Now the rest of Germany switched to only FFP2 in public transport.
So we do have some population studies. It didn't seem to make much of a difference. I'd say the factor overwhelming almost every other measure is the weather. More people outside means dropping case numbers. More people at home means rising case numbers.
It's been true for influenza and cold, and it's still holding up for Corona.
If any measure would make sense it would be to allow people to meet outside while forbidding it at home. They only forbade at home without allowing outside meetups, which made home parties more likely.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y agoVentilation could also be a factor. You're more likely to open the window when the air outside is pleasant.
- carlmr 5y agoTrue, which is why it's even more important to get people to meet outside. If you forbid inside and outside meetups, people will meet in secret, even closing their Windows so the neighbors don't snitch (this is Germany after all, the nation of snitches, historically :D). A little bit of basic human psychology could have prevented some of these waves.