5 ms·

Because masks never really made any statistical impact on the virus spread, so requiring them at this point means you’re not following the data you’re following

Because masks never really made any statistical impact on the virus spread, so requiring them at this point means you’re not following the data you’re following something else. (I was pro-mask for a while before we had data)

altcognito 5y ago
Let the surgeons know. Yes, compliance and knowing how to wear a mask has been an issue. That's not the same thing as "masks don't work." This is a random place to put this, but I just want to point out that I think for the most part even mask wearing is not required anymore (unless you are sick, but why are you going anywhere sick?) Part of the reason I put it here is that I want to make sure it's understood that despite the fact I'm pretty pro-vax, pro-mask and generally supported the lockdowns at the time -- we're past all that for now with Omicron. Things are still a mess, and the facts on the ground could change, but I think it's important that everybody gets on the same page that we're moving on.
- throwaway1777 5y ago
  Sounds like we basically agree even though we are coming at it from different angles.
  - altcognito 5y ago
    Not really. I'm saying masks work and mandates are necessary public health policy. Regardless of a mandate, people will do what they do even if it's not in their best interests, or in the interests of their loved ones, or the interests of their neighbors. They will smoke in public places, they will goto work sick, they will drive drunk. Frankly put, people can be jerks. So you put a mandate out there, and you do your best. Masks work. In areas where mask utilization is high, there is good air filtration and people follow distancing rules, the spread is slowed.
- vondur 5y ago
  Masks are still required where I live, yet we have some of the highest infection rates in the country. (Southern California)
- wrp 5y ago
  > Let the surgeons know. The surgeons already know. Since the 1990s, there has been a general movement away from using surgical masks in the OR, due to accumulating evidence that they have no effect. (For example, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/)
  - lejohnq 5y ago
    That link doesn’t indicate “accumulating evidence that they have no effect”, and the link explicitly states “it would be imprudent to recommend the removal of facemasks from surgery”. It is a literature review that didn’t find strong evidence for surgical mask effectiveness more because it hasn’t been researched deeply. And it notes that the absence of evidence does not indicate ineffectiveness of surgical masks, and rather a more significant research trial would have to be performed (and there were caveats to the feasibility of doing that as well). Specific quotes from that article: “What literature that is available on the subject tends to be dated with poorly explained methodology. There is also uncertainty over whether the results of such studies can be extrapolated to current surgical practice given the advent of new antiseptic techniques since they were completed.” “It is clear that more studies are required before any absolute conclusions can be drawn regarding the effectiveness or, indeed, ineffectiveness of surgical masks. The published literature does suggest that it may be reasonable to further examine the need for masks in contemporary surgical practice given the interests of comfort, budget constraints and potential ease of communication, although any such study would undoubtedly have to be large and well controlled to prove causality given the low event frequency of surgical site infections.” “It is important not to construe an absence of evidence for effectiveness with evidence for the absence of effectiveness. While there is a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of facemasks, there is similarly a lack of evidence supporting their ineffectiveness. With the information currently available, it would be imprudent to recommend the removal of facemasks from surgery. Instead, in the medical field where common practice can so easily become dogma, it is necessary to recognise the constant need to maintain a healthy scepticism towards established beliefs and to periodically re-evaluate and critically assess their scientific merit.”
    - spookthesunset 5y ago
freeflight 5y ago
As somebody who works with immuno-compromised patients, where wearing masks was already common before the pandemic; This reminds me a whole lot about original resistance against hand washing [0] Some measures are simply common sense practices and don't need an overwhelming amount of scientific studies to justify them. Particularly when the drawbacks to them are so minor, while the potential advantages are huge. [0] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/handwashing-once-controversial-medical-advice https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/handwashi...
- aakresearch 5y ago
  > Particularly when the drawbacks to them are so minor, while the potential advantages are huge. Does it justify mandatory wearing of religious symbols and tattoos? After all, there are almost no drawbacks, and "potential" advantage is even bigger. It was considered "common sense" for millennia.
CamperBob2 5y ago
What data do you have that show that masks don't have a statistical impact on spread, mortality, or both? Has this data been corrected for confounding factors and made widely available in replicated, peer-reviewed studies, or did you have to spend a half hour cherry-picking Google results to find it? The latter question sounds insulting and dismissive, but it's actually posed in good faith. It highlights a genuine epistemological problem about the nature, limits, and validity of our knowledge about the pandemic. I can find studies on PubMed and elsewhere that back up virtually any belief, prejudice, policy, or therapy that I like. So can you. Where does that leave us, except with the obvious solution of trusting our local, state, and national health authorities?
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  It’s not my job to prove masks don’t work. That isn’t how science works. It’s your job to prove masks are worth their costs to society. It’s your job to prove that I need to be forced to wear one for two years now. I see virtually no evidence that suggests masks do anything meaningful to the spread of Covid—especially enough to justify forcing service workers to wear them 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for two years straight. Especially now that anybody can get a vaccine. Why should service workers be required to wear them? To protect fully vaccinated people who are still afraid of Covid? Seems pretty selfish to ask that if people. Especially when service workers get bullied and gaslight by rich tech workers who think “masks are virtually costles” while their only time masking is their 1 hour weekly trip to the grocery store… These Covid measures are nothing more than forcing the lower class to protect the upper class (or at least pretends to. It’s all theater and we all know it). It is incredibly privileged to support any of the nonsense we’ve mandated the last two years.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - CamperBob2 5y ago
    It’s not my job to prove masks don’t work. Not my job, either. I'm not a doctor or public health authority. That's where I go for advice; do you have better sources in mind?
wrp 5y ago
> I was pro-mask for a while before we had data Before COVID-19, we had extensive analysis of previous pandemics, with the consistent judgment that public mask-wearing had no noticeable effect. For example, the DoD commissioned a study of the 1918-1920 pandemic. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30179067 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30179067)

altcognito 5y ago

Let the surgeons know. Yes, compliance and knowing how to wear a mask has been an issue. That's not the same thing as "masks don't work." This is a random place to put this, but I just want to point out that I think for the most part even mask wearing is not required anymore (unless you are sick, but why are you going anywhere sick?) Part of the reason I put it here is that I want to make sure it's understood that despite the fact I'm pretty pro-vax, pro-mask and generally supported the lockdowns at the time -- we're past all that for now with Omicron. Things are still a mess, and the facts on the ground could change, but I think it's important that everybody gets on the same page that we're moving on.

throwaway1777 5y ago
Sounds like we basically agree even though we are coming at it from different angles.
- altcognito 5y ago
  Not really. I'm saying masks work and mandates are necessary public health policy. Regardless of a mandate, people will do what they do even if it's not in their best interests, or in the interests of their loved ones, or the interests of their neighbors. They will smoke in public places, they will goto work sick, they will drive drunk. Frankly put, people can be jerks. So you put a mandate out there, and you do your best. Masks work. In areas where mask utilization is high, there is good air filtration and people follow distancing rules, the spread is slowed.
vondur 5y ago
Masks are still required where I live, yet we have some of the highest infection rates in the country. (Southern California)
wrp 5y ago
> Let the surgeons know. The surgeons already know. Since the 1990s, there has been a general movement away from using surgical masks in the OR, due to accumulating evidence that they have no effect. (For example, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/)
- lejohnq 5y ago
  That link doesn’t indicate “accumulating evidence that they have no effect”, and the link explicitly states “it would be imprudent to recommend the removal of facemasks from surgery”. It is a literature review that didn’t find strong evidence for surgical mask effectiveness more because it hasn’t been researched deeply. And it notes that the absence of evidence does not indicate ineffectiveness of surgical masks, and rather a more significant research trial would have to be performed (and there were caveats to the feasibility of doing that as well). Specific quotes from that article: “What literature that is available on the subject tends to be dated with poorly explained methodology. There is also uncertainty over whether the results of such studies can be extrapolated to current surgical practice given the advent of new antiseptic techniques since they were completed.” “It is clear that more studies are required before any absolute conclusions can be drawn regarding the effectiveness or, indeed, ineffectiveness of surgical masks. The published literature does suggest that it may be reasonable to further examine the need for masks in contemporary surgical practice given the interests of comfort, budget constraints and potential ease of communication, although any such study would undoubtedly have to be large and well controlled to prove causality given the low event frequency of surgical site infections.” “It is important not to construe an absence of evidence for effectiveness with evidence for the absence of effectiveness. While there is a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of facemasks, there is similarly a lack of evidence supporting their ineffectiveness. With the information currently available, it would be imprudent to recommend the removal of facemasks from surgery. Instead, in the medical field where common practice can so easily become dogma, it is necessary to recognise the constant need to maintain a healthy scepticism towards established beliefs and to periodically re-evaluate and critically assess their scientific merit.”
  - spookthesunset 5y ago

freeflight 5y ago

As somebody who works with immuno-compromised patients, where wearing masks was already common before the pandemic; This reminds me a whole lot about original resistance against hand washing [0] Some measures are simply common sense practices and don't need an overwhelming amount of scientific studies to justify them. Particularly when the drawbacks to them are so minor, while the potential advantages are huge. [0] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/handwashing-once-controversial-medical-advice https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/handwashi...

aakresearch 5y ago
> Particularly when the drawbacks to them are so minor, while the potential advantages are huge. Does it justify mandatory wearing of religious symbols and tattoos? After all, there are almost no drawbacks, and "potential" advantage is even bigger. It was considered "common sense" for millennia.

CamperBob2 5y ago

What data do you have that show that masks don't have a statistical impact on spread, mortality, or both? Has this data been corrected for confounding factors and made widely available in replicated, peer-reviewed studies, or did you have to spend a half hour cherry-picking Google results to find it? The latter question sounds insulting and dismissive, but it's actually posed in good faith. It highlights a genuine epistemological problem about the nature, limits, and validity of our knowledge about the pandemic. I can find studies on PubMed and elsewhere that back up virtually any belief, prejudice, policy, or therapy that I like. So can you. Where does that leave us, except with the obvious solution of trusting our local, state, and national health authorities?

spookthesunset 5y ago
It’s not my job to prove masks don’t work. That isn’t how science works. It’s your job to prove masks are worth their costs to society. It’s your job to prove that I need to be forced to wear one for two years now. I see virtually no evidence that suggests masks do anything meaningful to the spread of Covid—especially enough to justify forcing service workers to wear them 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for two years straight. Especially now that anybody can get a vaccine. Why should service workers be required to wear them? To protect fully vaccinated people who are still afraid of Covid? Seems pretty selfish to ask that if people. Especially when service workers get bullied and gaslight by rich tech workers who think “masks are virtually costles” while their only time masking is their 1 hour weekly trip to the grocery store… These Covid measures are nothing more than forcing the lower class to protect the upper class (or at least pretends to. It’s all theater and we all know it). It is incredibly privileged to support any of the nonsense we’ve mandated the last two years.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  It’s not my job to prove masks don’t work. Not my job, either. I'm not a doctor or public health authority. That's where I go for advice; do you have better sources in mind?

wrp 5y ago

> I was pro-mask for a while before we had data Before COVID-19, we had extensive analysis of previous pandemics, with the consistent judgment that public mask-wearing had no noticeable effect. For example, the DoD commissioned a study of the 1918-1920 pandemic. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30179067 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30179067)