Face masks, public policies and slowing the spread of Covid-19 | Hacker News Reader

Face masks, public policies and slowing the spread of Covid-19

sciencedirect.com

13 pointshheikinh20 comments

We know that Covid-19 is mainly spread through the air. Common sense would predict that wearing a face mask would reduce the spreading. This article contains some factual data to support this.

That's like saying common sense would predict that putting a net in a pool will slow the spread of kids' pee.

We know from the Fauci emails he was informed of the ineffectiveness of masks by the CDC and chose to push mask mandates regardless.

same in NL. until late 2020, face masks were regarded as 'fake security' by government officials. then suddenly that changed.

I think that’s a false analogy. A face mask surely contains part of a sneeze. Aerosols play an important part in the spread of many airborn viruses, and masks certainly change characteristics of mouth born aerosols.

To see a slightly tongue in cheek example, here’s masks vs flamible liquids. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x6cTDGqcUpA

That said, you are probably correct in that aerosols still escape most masks, and will saturate an enclosed area in a much faster time period than we have an intuition for. Still, I have reason to believe from numbers I’ve seen that masks reduce the odds of getting covid by 3-18% in any given hour of exposure. And reduction in spreading to others may be similarly effective. But, since you’re rolling the dice with each hour such a small amount of safety becomes increasingly less useful.

I’m willing to give the benefit of doubt and say that “masks are ineffective” as being shorthand for “if you spend 8 hours in an enclosed space with someone masks alone aren’t going to give enough benefit to be worth it.

Did you ever wear a face mask on a cold day? That made it clear just how much water vapour gets through.

It could be that masks are primarily useful as a signal. They remind people of Covid and people are more likely to distance, avoid sneezing or coughing, or otherwise be more cautious than they would be if no one were wearing one.

Perhaps we should bring back the plague masks.

Fortunately, we have the scientific method, which demands testability and reproducibility, and which shields us from faulty assumptions caused by "common sense".

I am referring to a scientific article. If you think it is wrong write another one.

pfff....barely. A state-level uncontrolled observational study? I don't see how it's possible to control all the confounding variables.

wearing a face mask correctly is not common sense, simply wearing a mask helps a lot, improper fit is also common missense

Obviously, but can we move on already? Covid culture is so strange to me. It’s like some people want to cling to Covid and virtue signal still wearing a mask when they are vaccinated. Perhaps a bit of Stockholm syndrome?

Vaccines aren't 100% effective. Some are closer to 50%. Wearing a mask isn't that much of a sacrifice especially indoors.

I don’t know where you are getting your information from, but Pfizer: 95 percent efficacy in preventing an infection in people with no prior infections. Moderna: 94.1 percent.

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-sin...

A large phase 3 trial in Brazil showed that two doses, administered at an interval of 14 days, had an efficacy of 51% against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 100% against severe COVID-19, and 100% against hospitalization starting 14 days after receiving the second dose.

Pfizer and Moderna vaccines aren't easily available outside of "first world" countries because of vaccine nationalism.

I got the Pfizer vaccine but it isn't available everywhere. Right now I'm in Thailand. The vaccines here (Sinovac and Astra) are closer to 50% effective from my understanding.

Also I just want to point out 95% is not 100% either. Even at 95% I don't mind wearing a mask indoors if I'm next to other people.

95% effective in preventing Covid but 100% effective at preventing severe Covid. If you shoot coronavirus up your nose, there's a 5% chance your body develops Covid-19. But even then, there's a 0% chance that you will die or require hospitalization because of it.

I'm not worried that I'll get a severe case of covid. I'm worried I'll pass it to somebody who will.

Zero percent is a very strong statement to make.

I've got two close friends, one of whom has diabetes, the other has cystic fibrosis. Neither of these is common enough to show up significantly in the testing. Both conditions predispose to a very, very bad outcome if they do get sick without the vaccine.

With the vaccine... I don't know. I don't think the testing has enough information to tell me. But it seems to me that there's a 5% chance of the disease getting a chance to start, and have its effect amplified by the pre-existing conditions.

Therefore, I'm wearing a mask right now, on top of being vaccinated. It probably won't help. A year from now, the odds are probably something under .01% that it makes any difference. But I don't like those odds, and the mask is a very small imposition.

I'm just saying that there's a big difference between 0.01% and 0%. I don't base my entire life on those almost-but-not-quite-zero odds, which would almost certainly become exhausting if I gave them a second thought. But in this case I have had to give it lots of thought, and the cost is small.

Removing the major source of non-verbal social cues, and an essential element of infant and child development, for an extended period, seems like it will be a huge sacrifice for a healthy society.

Also - I find it incredible that the effectiveness against viral infection of putting a piece of cloth over your face is favourably compared to the effectiveness of a vaccine.

I'm not comparing the effectiveness between the two. I'm saying I do both.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com