
Guidance against wearing masks for the coronavirus is wrong – cover your face - blankvideo
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/03/19/opinion/guidance-against-wearing-masks-coronavirus-is-wrong-you-should-cover-your-face
======
ergocoder
"Masks don't work or aren't needed" propaganda is so absurd.

According to physics and common sense, anything you put between you and the
cough-er is going to reduce the number of cough particles to reach you.

Anything will work with different effectiveness.

N95 > Surgical > Handkerchief > Covering your mouth with your hand.

CDC, US, and WHO are just so incompetent around this matter. If they didn't
want N95 shortage, they could've told people to wear cotton washable masks. It
was such a simple and effective solution that they couldn't think of.

Source:
[https://twitter.com/CMichaelGibson/status/123971835157384397...](https://twitter.com/CMichaelGibson/status/1239718351573843973)
Scarf is ~50% effective relative to surgical masks. Though this is tested
against influenza, it's still applicable to COVID

~~~
jws
The WHO rationale on masks includes not emboldening people to go out in less
than effective masks. Isolation is better at stopping the spread than slightly
slowing the spread with masks.

It’s also worth noting that there isn’t a straightforward way to map particle
blocking ratio of a mask to probability of becoming infected.

~~~
AndrewBissell
This whole "rationale" of feeding people noble lies so that some fleeting,
temporary gain can be had for the next few days or weeks, comes at the expense
of destroying their credibility in the public's eye and thereby making any
expert advice they might offer in the future far less convincing and
effective.

~~~
ergocoder
Yeah, when you say any kind of masks works, you will get someone comes in and
say:

WHO says masks are not effective. Also, do you have source that says masks
work?

I actually don't know how to reply to that.

Fortunately, Cambridge published a research about DIY mask against influenza.

Then, that person will say that's not covid. They aren't the same thing.

Science wins, I guess.

We cant say masks work without scientific research backing it up.

------
mikedilger
How do you correct misinformation when the guys at the top are wrong and
social media's intent on shuting down information that disagrees with the guys
at the top?

The amount of misinformation coming out of the WHO has been staggering and
hard to account for, but I will stop short of suggesting any conspiracy.

* They held that there was no evidence of person-to-person transmission for far too long in the face of evidence out of China.

* They claimed for far to long that if you weren't showing symptoms you weren't contagious. This advice has been very widely used to not quarantine people who were exposed to a person who got sick shortly after interactions... to devastating effect around the world.

* They claimed it does not spread through atomized particles, only droplets. This has been demonstrated to be false by experiment.

* They said masks are not effective.

* They said you didn't need to cover your eyes. Medical staff now wear full face shields.

* They said travel bans don't work. This defies basic logic.

* They delayed declaraing the pandemic to be a pandemic.

* They've been completely silent about ACE inhibitors and ARBs upregulating the expression of ACE2 receptors, and that available evidence strongly suggests that people on these medicines have much more severe reactions to the disease. WARNING: I cannot say whether these drugs are the cause -- it may well not be the case -- but shoudn't this have been seriously investigated by now?

~~~
EdwardDiego
> They claimed it does not spread through atomized particles, only droplets.
> This has been demonstrated to be false by experiment.

Do you have a link on this for further reading?

~~~
mikedilger
Unfortunately I never saw the papers on this and I'm looking for them now, so
take this bullet with a grain of salt. Two lines of research were relayed to
me verbally.

1\. In one experiment in a hospital room detected virus on surfaces but not in
the air, but it did so many (I vaguely recall it was 4) hours after the
patient was in the room. I think I heard this in answer to a press question
during a New Zealand official 1pm broadcast on COVID-19. They didn't
categorically claim it can't be atomized, but suggested strongly that this
wasn't expected to be a significant vector for transmission.

2\. The other source was a paper someone linked to on Twitter. And I neglected
to download it. But someone physically atomized material with the virus and
then after some time period was able to detect the virus still atomized in the
air. This proved it was possible to remain atomized, but not that sick people
actually atomize the virus well. Again, perhaps not a significant mode of
transmission.

I'll keep looking. I'll temporarily retract that bullet point.

~~~
rriepe
I believe the incident you're referring to was actually an apartment building
outbreak, not a study. As an event it _seemed_ to confirm the
airborne/atomized/fecal-oral spread early on. Somebody got someone in another
part of their building sick.

------
lvturner
On a recent 9hr flight I gave a couple sitting near me my last two masks. I
don't think they realised this was a selfish and not a selfless act.

------
Gatsky
This mask thing is a strange phenomenon. I suppose it is similar to panic
buying toilet paper - people just feel the need to do something and blame
someone. In Australia, although there has been panic buying of toilet paper,
nobody is talking much about masks, or the lack of strong recommendations to
wear them. In the USA, this is apparently a major issue, and a source of
suspicion and mistrust of the government and various healthcare bodies. I
don't get the obsession with it.

As a public health intervention, social distancing is vastly more effective
and deserving of emphasis than mask wearing. There aren't enough masks. Public
health orgs were worried about running out of masks, which is exactly what has
happened, and this is a huge problem for doctors and nurses who whinge about
it a lot less than your random person on twitter decrying the apparent
conspiracy to stop mask wearing.

The surgeon general's tweet (February 29) at the time was reasonable. On Feb
29 there were 66 cases in a country with 327 million people.

------
l0b0
I always thought that was a simple fiction to stop selfish hoarders from
giving themselves a (randomly chosen) 10% better chance of staying healthy as
opposed to people who actually need a mask to have a 200% better chance of not
developing life-threatening symptoms.

But of course, truth is more important than lives. Which will earn lots of
anger from people who contributed to the mask shortage, but I don't care. I'm
not saying I'm right about the previous paragraph, just that it's a simpler
explanation based on basic human nature than some conspiracy theory.

------
robocat
Mask facts or fictions...

What does Taiwan say? We should follow leaders like Taiwan: they were at huge
risk, yet economy is running and schools open, their VP is an epidemiologist
and he was minister of health during their SARS outbreak. Taiwan’s CDC says:
“Prevention is the same as for other respiratory infections including washing
hands frequently, wearing masks and cleaning up secretion from the mouth and
nose appropriately. Other measures include avoiding crowded places such as
markets or local hospitals, avoiding contact with animals and dead animals and
avoiding eating raw meat or eggs. Additionally, you should wear masks and
attend medical attention immediately when flu-like symptoms occur (such as
body temperature ≧38℃, and coughing, etc)” -
[https://www.cdc.gov.tw/En/Category/QAPage/LnqBFJsulw6fW3nswc...](https://www.cdc.gov.tw/En/Category/QAPage/LnqBFJsulw6fW3nswc04Yw)
and “Our guidelines and policy for wearing masks have not changed, but people
should consider wearing a mask in enclosed crowded spaces with poor air
ventilation,” Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中), who heads
the center, told a news conference in Taipei. People who must attend events in
small crowded venues, where they would have frequent and close contact with
other people, are advised to wear a mask, he said.”. Of course Taiwan also has
many other layers of effective control against Covid:
[https://www.dw.com/en/taiwan-
coronavirus/a-52724523](https://www.dw.com/en/taiwan-coronavirus/a-52724523)
and a wired article too: [https://www.wired.com/story/taiwan-is-beating-the-
coronaviru...](https://www.wired.com/story/taiwan-is-beating-the-coronavirus-
can-the-us-do-the-same/)

Also i think it is significant that citizens commonly wear masks in the
countries that are most successful at controlling the virus (and haven’t shut
down their economies, Taiwan, Vietnam, SK, Singapore, Japan). It is a social
stigma to not wear a mask in some places. However, although Japan looks like
they have slowed the outbreak maybe they are just at the corner of the hockey
stick. And in HK: “Dr. Pak-Leung Ho, head of Centre for infection at @hkumed
... highlighted universal mask-wearing as one of the reasons widespread
outbreak didn't occur.”
[https://twitter.com/lwcalex/status/1235091542219448321](https://twitter.com/lwcalex/status/1235091542219448321)

There is a huge back-pressure against wearing masks in western countries,
which leads to an environment of glib advice against them. I know this isn’t a
very scientific issue, but I think it matters.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-
face-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-
masks.html) and “Why some countries wear face masks and others don't”
[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52015486](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52015486)

Finally, here is a sciency article “Would everyone wearing face masks help us
slow the pandemic?”: [https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/would-everyone-
weari...](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/would-everyone-wearing-face-
masks-help-us-slow-pandemic)

~~~
bscphil
From your "sciency article"

> Even experts who favor masking the masses say their impact on the spread of
> disease is likely to be modest. Many are also afraid to promote mask buying
> amid dire shortages at hospitals. But as the pandemic wears on, some public
> health experts think government messages discouraging mask wearing should
> shift.

> “It’s really a perfectly good public health intervention that’s not used,”
> argues KK Cheng, a public health expert at the University of Birmingham.
> “It’s not to protect yourself. It’s to protect people against the droplets
> coming out of your respiratory tract.”

So even this pro-mask article makes it sound to me like wearing a mask will
not protect _you_ from getting the virus. At best, they're effective at
presenting people who don't know they're sick from infecting others. And that
only works if you can mask a significant portion of the population _without_ a
shortage of masks for people who we _know_ need them. That doesn't seem to be
the case in the United States at present.

~~~
d2p
> At best, they're effective at presenting people who don't know they're sick
> from infecting others.

I don't have numbers, but I'm pretty sure the number of people infected by
people that didn't know they were sick is significant. Imagine if all those
sick people wore masks (or some substitute, like a scarf over their
mouth/nose).

If we can agree that wearing a mask (or substitite) if you might be sick is a
good idea, but you don't know if you might be sick, that seems to translate to
wearing a mask (or substitute) is a good idea.

> that only works if you can mask a significant portion of the population
> without a shortage of masks for people who we know need them.

I agree it's important to reserve masks for those who need them most, but that
doesn't mean we have to teach people they are not effective. We could instead
teach them how "non-masks" can make very reasonable substitutes. And let's not
forget that reducing the spread has a real impact on the need for healthcase
workers to have them.

~~~
robocat
> I don't have numbers, but I'm pretty sure the number of people infected by
> people that didn't know they were sick is significant.

Look at the number of asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic cases (approx 50%) there
are in the two full population studies on the Princess Cruise ship, and Vò (in
Italy).

------
blankvideo
[http://archive.is/TDq6W](http://archive.is/TDq6W)

------
factsaresacred
_" Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing
general public from catching #Coronavirus"_ \- U.S. Surgeon General

A flat out lie from the leading spokesperson on matters of public health.

All of the hand-wringing about foreign misinformation. But what if the
misinformation is coming from within the house?

~~~
bscphil
I don't see any particular reason to trust the opinion section of the Boston
Globe over the US Surgeon General or the WHO, but that's just me. I'm even
more hesitant about calling that claim a "flat out lie". As far as I can tell,
these are just two people with a point of view, who don't link to a single
study on the matter.

Seriously though, do you have any evidence that the consensus of the medical
profession is that getting the general, non-sick population to wear masks is
useful in combating the crisis? I'm open to the possibility that it is, but
remain rather skeptical.

~~~
factsaresacred
> _do you have any evidence that the consensus of the medical profession is
> that getting the general, non-sick population to wear masks is useful in
> combating the crisis?_

Yes:

[https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(03\)13168-6/fulltext)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3810906/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3810906/)

[https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712%2808%2901008-4...](https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712%2808%2901008-4/fulltext)

"Wearing a face mask was a protective factor against influenza infection."

"The staff who wore surgical masks and N95 masks were significantly associated
with non-infection."

"In compliant users, masks were highly efficacious."

Also common sense. If you wear a mask you reduce the probability that you
transmit the virus. And, to a lesser extent, you reduce the probability that
you are infected by the virus.

Claiming that "they are not effective" is simply false. Perhaps "lie" is too
strong, but it was untrue and irresponsible considering the position he holds.

~~~
DrScump

      "Wearing a face mask was a protective factor against influenza infection."
    

The key word there is _influenza_.

~~~
factsaresacred
It's about the size of the particles (both COVID-19 and flu are 80–120 nm) not
the type of virus.

Besides, the other links concern a SARS virus.

------
jeffrallen
If you were at home like you should be, you wouldn't need a mask.

~~~
nilkn
While true, the disease was being spread weeks or a full month ago by
asymptomatic people who didn’t know they had it before quarantines were in
place. And that’s when we had every major news source, including the NYT,
telling people that masks aren’t effective and not to buy or wear them.

------
mam2
Masks should bé given to Care workers or sick people.. no one else

------
lnsru
It should be a common sense to cover your face during pandemic. It is 3
centuries old wisdom:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_doctor_costume](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_doctor_costume)

It is amazing how people naively believe in politician’s bullshit. The same is
with “don’t hoard the food” with appearing articles about shortage of cheap
workers in agricultural sector.

Next week a dude is coming to each flat in a complex with hundreds of flats to
inspect pipes. There is pandemic outside, but it’s best time to inspect
pieces. Politicians scream every day about pandemic and how one should stay at
home. Maybe this pipe inspection might wait couple months!?

~~~
EdwardDiego
They're asking people not to hoard the food because of the impact it has on
people who can't afford to buy a month's worth of groceries in advance.

If those privileged enough to be able to afford to hoard have cleaned out the
supermarkets to an extent that the supermarkets' supply chain isn't designed
for, the person shopping weekly is screwed.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

~~~
lnsru
I and some friends (older people) have always food at home for couple weeks.
Older flats in Germany have designated rooms in a flat for storing food. In my
flat it’s in the corridor, but in friend’s flat it’s directly in the kitchen.

On the other hand I saw the hoarders in action: throwing 2 shopping carts with
cans to the car’s trunk. Really disgusting. Especially knowing, that this
canned food does not taste well and will end in a landfill afterwards.

------
goldenkey
I made a video precisely about this and other misinformation:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGh9yNpEhQM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGh9yNpEhQM)

~~~
mikedilger
You talk a lot about boosting your immune system. This is very hard to study
because immune function is broad and complex so it's hard to measure and test
any such claims. Therefore claims like these are widespread but often not
backed up with good science.

The best way to boost your immune function is to be exposed to a pathogen.
Then you will develop antibodies. Those antibodies boost your ability to avoid
that pathogen. Vaccines work in a similar way. Of course this advice is
currently useless in the context of COVID-19.

Specific foods and supplements might help here and there, but most of the
evidence is that they are antimicrobial (antibiotic/antiviral/antifungal) in
vitro. There's much less research in vivo. That's not to say that some foods
won't help, but just not to rely on them having a significant effect in your
body. The effect, if any, is probably very slight.

There is stronger evidence for a healthy lifestyle: regular exercise,
maintaining a healthy weight, getting adequate sleep, avoiding infection, not
smoking, minimizing stress. Some good evidence for sun exposure too.

Back on the foods though, you didn't mention black elderberry syrup (sambucus
nigra). A 2004 study (randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled) showed
efficacy against
influenza.[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15080016](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15080016)
and a 2016 study (randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled) showing it
reduced the duration of the common cold (often a coronavirus):
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4848651/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4848651/)
And it's quite safe -- Europeans traditionally use it for pancake syrup.

