They have been issuing logically inconsistent statements for weeks saying masks don't work for the general public but do work for healthcare providers. It's difficult to then turn around and say masks work for everyone without losing all credibility.
And in many of those cases they were trying to convince people N95 masks wouldn't protect them. Imagine now trying to convince people that less effective things work (surgical masks, cloth masks, folded t shirts, etc...)
Yesterday morning the surgeon general tweeted "They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus"
There has been tons of rhetoric designed to discourage the public from buying masks that gives the impression that public wearing masks won't help. A lot of headlines to that effect that lack any nuance at all.
I wonder if this is due to risk of beating facial recognition technology. If masks become common, add in sun glasses and most facial recognition cameras will fail. Governments will be back to zero on tracking their citizens. I know this sounds nuts but I keep thinking why there was such a strong push against public wearing these masks.
A much simpler explanation would be to preserve stocks of masks for medical personnel who actually really need them. It's certainly beneficial for your average person to wear one at all times - look at the declines in flu happening right now as we separate from one another. But it's essential for medical personnel who are on the front lines of this war.
It's often helpful to evaluate conspiracy theories using Occam's Razor. What's the simplest explanation which fits the facts?
That's true though, isn't it? A mask will not prevent you from getting the virus, since covering your own mouth from others coughing doesn't really help you. If you are sick though, it protects others.
> A mask will not prevent you from getting the virus, since covering your own mouth from others coughing doesn't really help you. If you are sick though, it protects others.
What is the mechanism for this?
At first, I'd expect it to be the other way around--if I'm wearing a mask and cough the mask is going to bear the full force of my cough. All of the cough is hitting the mask, and the cough is moving at its fastest speed.
If I'm not wearing a mask and you are, my cough is going to be spread out some when it reaches you and slowed by air resistance, so your mask should only have to deal with a fraction of my cough and at lower velocity.
Thus, I'd expect your mask to have a much easier task than mine.
Is it that the drops of moisture (and phlegm and whatever else might be in a cough) are bigger at the point of emission and break apart as they disperse, and so they have a harder time going through a mask at my end than at your end?
If that is the case, I still have to wonder what happens on subsequent coughs. I cough, producing big drops that the mask stops. Still, the viruses in the drops have to go somewhere when the mask absorbs the droplets, right? Does my mask end up moistened with virus-contaminated water? Will my subsequent coughs as they blast air through the mask then be able to knock small virus laden droplets off my mask?
My understanding is that, as you said, the purpose of the mask is to stop droplets from coughs and sneezes from getting to other people and surfaces. However if others cough on you when you are wearing a mask, the rest of your face is still exposed so you are not fully protected, and you can still be infected by touching contaminated surfaces and then touching your face. Surgical masks are also not sealed off, so you can breath in aerosol from other people's coughs even with the mask.
Certainly masks will help to some degree, as they will filter out some particles and protect you if someone directly coughs into the mask, but I don't think they are effective compared to things like hand washing.
It still reduces particles you inhale. Sure virus is smaller than holes in your average mask but usually virus will be floating in fluid. Those should get stopped by mask.
Personally, I have been using these cheap masks for over a decade whenever I have to clean any dusty place like a garage. If I don't wear one, I am almost guaranteed a a bad allergic reaction. If I do wear one while cleaning, I might sneeze a bit but usually not need Benadryl and pass out for rest of the day.
I imagine same principle applies when it comes to COVID19.
It's misleading. Even improvised masks will reduce the chance of asymptomatic carriers spreading the disease, thus reducing the chance of the general public catching it. Note the "general public" language in the tweet. Even if there is a way to parse that tweet that renders it technically correct, it's still phrased in a way that is certain to mislead a lot of people.
There are thin people who are “fat on the inside” who are less healthy than larger people. That said I have no insight into the health of either subject.
An example of what the type of thing intended (I presume) by the previous poster: Fatty-liver disease. "NAFLD is observed in up to 80% of obese people... and in up to 20% of normal weight people". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatty_liver_disease
AFAIU, some populations are more likely to exhibit non-overweight, non-obese NAFLD. Likewise for type 2 diabetes.
Er, what? Pretty sure GP was referring to the difference between subcutaneous and visceral fat. Visceral fat is behind the abdominal wall and puts extra pressure on internal organs.
