Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dougmany 2209 days ago
I am always amused at how effective the There is no scientific evidence line is. That just means it has not been studied. No one has studied masks on this specific strain? It's new for crying out loud.
2 comments

> No one has studied masks on this specific strain?

You're misrepresenting the entire problem.

The main unknown is not that protective equipment helps protect. That's a absurd strawman.

The main unknown is the impact on the likelihood that someone not educated or trained or experienced in facing biological hazards would contract a virus when knowingly exposing themselves to the virus while wearing said protective equipment to the best of their personal abilities, discipline, and knowledge.

That's the main unknown.

Meanwhile, do keep in mind that the effectiveness of condoms to stop unwanted pregnancies, which are pretty much widespread and even covered by classes included as part of mandatory public education, has been as low as 79% if poorly used.

https://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-condom...

I'd say the condom analogy is great, and with R around 3, reduction in transmission beyond 70% means the damned infection rate grows no more.
What? That makes no sense at all. Just because condoms can have low effectiveness it doesn't mean that wearing face masks makes the epidemic go magically away. What kind of twisted logic is that?

The main point is that face masks are known to not be full proof, and badly worn ones might even be less effective than not wearing anything as they provide incentives for people to repeatedly touch their faces. More importantly facemasks create a false sense of safety and thus invite unwitting people to needlessly expose themselves to the virus.

If you want to understand the problem, think of combat helmets. You can put one on and safely walk into a war zone, right?

Ok, then that is the exact thing where you misunderstand.

The mask is not protecting you. It is protecting others from you.

If you were right, and wearing masks badly would have been worse than not wearing them at all (i.e. w.r.t. touching your face and all that), then countries that opted for mandatory mask wearing would be worse off and they aren't.

Related: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v1

There is a lot of work on respiratory viruses and masks, and none of the RCTs can find a benefit of wearing masks.

> No one has studied masks on this specific strain? It's new for crying out loud.

Yes they have. Here's one where they take four patients who have covid-19 and fit them with masks and ask them to cough onto petri dishes. They find covid outside the masks.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

It is interesting that the cotton masks were more effective than the surgical mask:

>The median viral loads after coughs without a mask, with a surgical mask, and with a cotton mask were 2.56 log copies/mL, 2.42 log copies/mL, and 1.85 log copies/mL, respectively

My point was that if the statement read Scientific evidence shows masks are not effective it would means something. The lack of evidence showing effectiveness does not disprove effectiveness.

"This article has been retracted. See Notice of Retraction."

Yeah, maybe don't go around citing that one.

This was binary test. It looks like they were testing if Covid-19 passed through masks or not. They did not look at N95 masks, nor did they look at seeing if the viral load was decreased.

"This experiment did not include N95 masks and does not reflect the actual transmission of infection from patients with COVID-19 wearing different types of masks. We do not know whether masks shorten the travel distance of droplets during coughing. Further study is needed to recommend whether face masks decrease transmission of virus from asymptomatic individuals or those with suspected COVID-19 who are not coughing."

Looks like the authors retracted this one!