SKIP THE FACE MASKS! ....... Ummmm........ HANG ON! U-TURN?

[exchemist]

Note that I stated, specifically: "could increase your chances of avoiding infection" - I did not (and would not) state that it makes you invulnerable to infection. There is probably nothing short of life in a bubble that is going to do that.

The reality is, if I were even to breathe instead through my jacket in the crook of my arm, this alone would also provide an amount of protection from contracting the virus from moisture particles in the air around me. It is a simple matter of providing a filter - a dry filter, within which moist particles can become trapped. Any amount of filter like this decreases your chance of infection. Anyone who says otherwise is stuck on the hyperbolic - i.e. "IT DOESN'T PROTECT YOU FROM EVERYTHING!" This is an unrealistic expectation, and misses the point entirely.

Why are we all staying home and going out only when necessary? Because it decreases the chances that we will contract the virus. Does it protect us from the virus entirely? No. So why are we doing it? Of course the answer is completely obvious, and I have now stated it several times in this post alone.

OK, keep your hair on. As I say, the argument I've seen is about giving people false confidence. But it looks as if they are revisiting the idea, so your unrecognised brilliance may be vindicated at last.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

OK, keep your hair on. As I say, the argument I've seen is about giving people false confidence. But it looks as if they are revisiting the idea, so your unrecognised brilliance may be vindicated at last.

Brilliance? More like the most common of sense. How long has humanity been using filters? How long have we known that viruses most often propagate through transmission of fluid? How well does almost any dry, porous material absorb moisture?

Face masks weren't my idea. You understand I didn't claim this, right? Let's stick to the facts.

 

[MNoBody]

you know, just for interests sake, medical industries have been the benchmark setters for sanitizing HVAC systems, and other innovative modalities, new tech... like UVC light sterilization...eliminates chemical resistant strains...hmmmm...so why are people panic-ing

 

[Heyo]

you know, just for interests sake, medical industries have been the benchmark setters for sanitizing HVAC systems, and other innovative modalities, new tech... like UVC light sterilization...eliminates chemical resistant strains...hmmmm...so why are people panic-ing

Because the knowledge about the tech is there - but the tech isn't. Those things have to be made and be available and they aren't.

 

[MNoBody]

Because the knowledge about the tech is there - but the tech isn't. Those things have to be made and be available and they aren't.

found this
Full Page Reload
[^link didn't display proper-title of article below]
Startups Unveil Tech to Fight Coronavirus; the Challenge May Be Getting Enough Engineers

 

[Augustus]

Regarding COVID-19 specifically, I actually doubt there is any evidence.

Neither coronaviruses or viruses in general are a blank slate, there is evidence.

Whenever presented with a novel situation, we don't forget everything we know about similar situations and start saying "technically we have no specific evidence for this situation therefore we need to start from scratch. As we have never tried mass use of masks during a novel virus pandemic before, the best assumption is that most people will not benefit from them until proven otherwise."

The assumption is that they do work unless proven otherwise.

If someone you loved was highly vulnerable but insisted on going about their life as normal, you would try to make them wear a mask if you had one, wouldn't you?

Regardless, that isn't the statement we're talking about. It was "we're not aware of any specific evidence supporting the mass use of masks".

No, again; "no evidence supporting the mass use of masks". Who is misrepresenting the facts now?

The evidence that the mass use of masks is effective is the same as the evidence that the individual use of masks is effective.

So, the question is "Given what we know about viruses and PPE, is there strong evidence that wearing a mask does not reduce the likelihood of an individual catching or spreading coronavirus?"

Unless the answer to that question is yes, the rational assumption is that individuals should wear masks. This is because:

A) The best interpretation of available evidence is that mask do indeed work.
B) The payoff is massively asymmetric: the upside of being right, is much more than the downside of being wrong.

I won't quote the statement yet again, you can just scroll up. Nobody said there is evidence against there being benefit.

I said evidence of being worse off, because that is what he said: "In fact, there's some evidence to suggest the opposite..."

You can take it as an irrelevant question. Would you prefer I had a supply of masks or my doctor friend working in the local A&E having a supply of masks? We can play silly games all we want, it doesn't make any difference to the big picture.

It is not the job of the WHO to make sophistic claims that people in general wouldn't benefit from wearing masks just to avoid a massive increase in demand. Their job is to save lives, and government needs to commandeer all stocks of medical grade PPE and ban its sale to the public if necessary.

There are all kinds of masks that would not be suitable for medical professionals yet could provide protection for average people. Millions of people have masks sitting around at home for DIY and the like, and companies could quickly produce masks for the public that are below medical grade. People could even make them at home and gain some protection.

When we are told that, in fact, masks do actually work, how do you think people will view expert medical and scientific advice? Even beyond coronavirus, this will be a disaster for public trust in such institutions.

The bottom line is that nobody can know for certain and the people making the decisions had to collate a whole mess of incomplete and mixed evidence and information to come up with a viable policy. Even with the second guessing happening now, based on additional information (and a whole load of speculation), that doesn't mean their decisions at the time were wrong. It certainly doesn't justify condemning or insulting them now.

It's not exactly rocket science that masks designed to protect people from infection do just that, and that people who wear them are less likely to catch or spread infection.

To start from the assumption that this works on the individual level, but not on the mass level so we are better off without them very much justifies harsh criticism because it costs many, many lives.

In complex situations, with lack of definitive evidence and fast changing events, you should err towards precaution because the cost of being wrong is much lower. Had everyone done this, we wouldn't have been in this position in the first place and we still are making the same mistake now.

 

[McBell]

Based on my watching people...
masks no more effective than a status symbol or fashion statement.

People think they are protecting themselves or others by wearing them, but the reality is that they have no clue what they are doing with them.

First problem that I noticed is most people are wearing masks that do not fit.
So they are constantly rearranging them.
More than one person I have observed holding the mask in place.
Then there are those who have their nose out of the mask.
Or the ones who have it on their chins barely covering their mouth.

Then there are those who remove the mask to cough.
The ones who remove it to sneeze.
Then there was the couple that would remove the mask to kiss their friends, who also removed their masks for the kiss. (the touch your lips to each cheek kiss)

 

[Augustus]

Regardless, that isn't the statement we're talking about. It was "we're not aware of any specific evidence supporting the mass use of masks".

Just for fun, took all of 5 minutes for me to find some specific evidence (albeit limited):

A modelling study suggests that the use of facemasks in the community may help delay and contain a pandemic, although efficacy estimates were not based on RCT data.101 Community masks were protective during the SARS outbreaks, and about 76% of the population used a facemask in Hong Kong.102 There is evidence that masks have efficacy in the community setting, subject to compliance13 and early use.12 18 19
MacIntyre, C. R., & Chughtai, A. A. (2015). Facemasks for the prevention of infection in healthcare and community settings. BMJ, 350(apr09 1), h694–h694. doi:10.1136/bmj.h694

 

[oldbadger]

you know, just for interests sake, medical industries have been the benchmark setters for sanitizing HVAC systems, and other innovative modalities, new tech... like UVC light sterilization...eliminates chemical resistant strains...hmmmm...so why are people panic-ing

UVC sterilization us yonks old. I remember seeing it being used 60 years ago.

......only saying, is all.

 

[HonestJoe]

IF!!!!
I wrote IF !!!

Yes, if masks were "known to be useful for all", you would have had a point but since they're not, the point is irrelevant.

And the WHO is reviewing it's previous guidance

Good. They should (and I'm sure do) constantly reassess their guidance in the face of new information. That doesn't mean the old guidance was wrong and it certainly doesn't mean they were being deceptive.

 

[Augustus]

Yes, if masks were "known to be useful for all", you would have had a point but since they're not, the point is irrelevant.

If we want to retreat behind a semantic shield, it may not be 'known', just overwhelmingly probable given the available scientific evidence.

Unless you think that the best way to stop the pandemic includes highly contagious, (asymptomatic) sick people not wearing masks, and those who come into contact with them also not wearing masks.

Not to mention the biggest argument against masks seems to be 'some people won't use them properly' when we could pretty easily teach most people to use them more effectively.

That doesn't mean the old guidance was wrong

To quote Orwell, "Some idea are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them."

 

[oldbadger]

Yes, if masks were "known to be useful for all", you would have had a point but since they're not, the point is irrelevant.

Good. They should (and I'm sure do) constantly reassess their guidance in the face of new information. That doesn't mean the old guidance was wrong and it certainly doesn't mean they were being deceptive.

In the UK specialists have been discussing face masks on television for the last 24 hours like never before. It's sad that this did not happen several weeks ago, I think.

The consensus is that they are very valuable for all to wear and we are already seeing how this is increasing their use, from our postal workers, shoppers, joggers, shop staff etc.

And so I will be wearing a mask in shops, or any confined areas.

What you do is up to you or your local shops etc

 

[oldbadger]

If we want to retreat behind a semantic shield, it may not be 'known', just overwhelmingly probable given the available scientific evidence.

Unless you think that the best way to stop the pandemic includes highly contagious, (asymptomatic) sick people not wearing masks, and those who come into contact with them also not wearing masks.

Not to mention the biggest argument against masks seems to be 'some people won't use them properly' when we could pretty easily teach most people to use them more effectively.



To quote Orwell, "Some idea are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them."

I love the Orwell quote.
Love it....

Thanks

 

[oldbadger]

Based on my watching people...
masks no more effective than a status symbol or fashion statement.

People think they are protecting themselves or others by wearing them, but the reality is that they have no clue what they are doing with them.

First problem that I noticed is most people are wearing masks that do not fit.
So they are constantly rearranging them.
More than one person I have observed holding the mask in place.
Then there are those who have their nose out of the mask.
Or the ones who have it on their chins barely covering their mouth.

Then there are those who remove the mask to cough.
The ones who remove it to sneeze.
Then there was the couple that would remove the mask to kiss their friends, who also removed their masks for the kiss. (the touch your lips to each cheek kiss)

The way that things are moving common sense wise, shops will be insisting that shoppers wear masks here.
Best you stay at home.

 

[oldbadger]

OK, keep your hair on. As I say, the argument I've seen is about giving people false confidence. But it looks as if they are revisiting the idea, so your unrecognised brilliance may be vindicated at last.

Hair on? And brilliance? I wish....

I know why you are not much impressed with masks. You keep having this dream of the choir in Southwark Cathedral all having to sing through them. Now that would be a nightmare indeed for you folks.

 

[exchemist]

Hair on? And brilliance? I wish....

I know why you are not much impressed with masks. You keep having this dream of the choir in Southwark Cathedral all having to sing through them. Now that would be a nightmare indeed for you folks.

Actually, I am agnostic about the value of masks in this situation, but I tend to listen to experts, unfashionable though that is, rather than just dismissing their advice based on some homespun "common sense" rationale.

I've learnt enough science to know that common sense is not always a reliable guide, and that experts are not always idiots.

(Personally, as I am >90% sure I have had the virus and recovered, a mask does not particularly matter to me one way or the other.)

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I hope your wife and all other medical workers keep safe at this time.
Can't see the bloody enemy, is the dreadful risk.

Thanks mate, appreciate the sentiment.

About your post, I feel sure that officials would not have knowingly deceived us all, they just thought masks were not helpful, but if they had done that instead of requisitioning all from retail and then advising us to wear scarfs and make masks...... see the difference?

I get your point, honestly I do. But the way I look at this is kinda running at a tangent to how you do. And I don't mean that you're wrong...just different.

I touch my face all the blooming time, and so used isopropyl alc regularly, but would wear a mask in a shop now.

I get the sentiment, although I'm gonna assume you sanitize everything after being to the shop, otherwise it kinda doesn't make sense to me.

Our postmen started wearing masks just today.

Heh...kinda made me laugh, although it's admittedly gallows humour. I was just imagining me pushing back on a bunch of arguments, then suddenly flip-flopping when I heard your postman was wearing a mask...!!

 

[oldbadger]

(Personally, as I am >90% sure I have had the virus and recovered, a mask does not particularly matter to me one way or the other.)

Wow!
If you have had the virus then you are one lucky person. Really!
I wish that my wife and self were both on the other side of this infection just for what ever amount of protection that might offer for now.

What was your illness like? Obviously you had all the symptoms of covid-19....... when was that? How long did it last? How bad was it for you?

 

[oldbadger]

Thanks mate, appreciate the sentiment.

I get your point, honestly I do. But the way I look at this is kinda running at a tangent to how you do. And I don't mean that you're wrong...just different.

Sure. It doesn't matter how we approach problems, so long as we've got something right when they finally arrive on our doorstep.
This sickness is a blooming lottery, and it's going to nobble some of the quick and the slow regardless.
My wife has just told me that the Beeb is reporting that Americans have been advised to wear masks in public...... now if that is correct it just shows how any country can change its mind at mostly any time.
What can anybody say?

I get the sentiment, although I'm gonna assume you sanitize everything after being to the shop, otherwise it kinda doesn't make sense to me.

Sure. I don't........ the little hounds and self as regarded as skanky by Mrs Badger, but she washes tins and containers and mist sprays any other items.

Heh...kinda made me laugh, although it's admittedly gallows humour. I was just imagining me pushing back on a bunch of arguments, then suddenly flip-flopping when I heard your postman was wearing a mask...!!

I caught the humour in that...... true!
Don't get superior now!
The Post Office has stopped postal workers travelling together in their vans, and they are wearing masks now.
Two postal workers operate from one van. But now only one can be in the van, so deliveries take longer.

The trick is to switch off the brainy bits and just do what we are told when we go out, otherwise we will be like the ranting nutcases that get carted away for shouting and stamping the floor as they go in to intellectual meltdown over some amazing requirement. This is obviously easier for those of us who have smaller brainy bits.

 

[exchemist]

Wow!
If you have had the virus then you are one lucky person. Really!
I wish that my wife and self were both on the other side of this infection just for what ever amount of protection that might offer for now.

What was your illness like? Obviously you had all the symptoms of covid-19....... when was that? How long did it last? How bad was it for you?

I had it very mildly. Slight nagging dry cough for 48hrs, then a night of tossing and turning feeling feverish, with heart racing a bit. In the morning no real fever, but low grade fever (<38C) that afternoon and evening, plus a lot of muscular aches for 72hrs. I had to take paracetamol twice for upper back ache, not for fever at all (my brother, who is a doctor, had a similar experience).

The worst effect was to come, however: sudden and total loss of smell and taste, between lunchtime and dinnertime on the same day (day 4). Notably, this occurred in spite of having completely clear nose and sinuses. That was 12 days ago now. Some of my sense of taste and smell has come back, but a lot of what I eat still tastes like cotton wool, and I wake each morning with the sensation of having slept with an Arab's toe in my mouth - a weird and not specially pleasant pseudo-taste, which is detectable at intervals throughout the day. I think each day is a slight improvement on the one before, but it seems to be a long haul. I've briefly lost my sense of taste and smell before with 'flu', but never in this way. I'm just hoping I get it back eventually.