[WillPostForFood]

"When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face"

What do you think is being communicated here? It makes you feel better, but there are unintended consequences is worse than they don't work, it is saying they are worse than nothing. Around the same time the Surgeon General more explicitly said they don't work.

“They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if health care providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!”

Which was an absurd statement at the time - if they are not effective for the public, why would health care providers need them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-n95-fa...

[quesera]

This a classic communication error. Media can't handle subtlety of message. It's a mistake Fauci should not make, being a decades-long expert.

But I hear, and I heard at the time, "Masks help, but they are not perfect, and if you use them in the obviously-wrong way, they are useless or harmful".

Which aligns with my understanding of every tool used for any purpose.

The Surgeon General, OTOH, was never a person to be taken seriously. But I don't blame Fauci for that.

[ergocoder]

It wasn't communication error. Fauci admitted he lied for the greater good.

It was really short-sighted. He could have suggested cloth masks.

And Fauci was considered the best COVID thought leader. US is so dead.

[quesera]

> Fauci admitted he lied for the greater good.

Again, this is repeated a lot -- but it does not match my memory, nor can I find evidence of it in my searches.

If you know differently, please share a link.

> He could have suggested cloth masks.

IIRC, the consensus pre-COVID and post-SARS, was that cloth masks are inferior to N95 masks. When the supply of N95 masks was not considered unreliable, there was no need for public health to think about bandanas.

In Feb/Mar, before asymptomatic transmission was proven, it was reasonable to not bother suggesting cloth masks, and simultaneously to preserve the "useful" (N95) masks for the most at-risk.

> US is so dead.

There were so many failures. The system that Fauci was relying upon turned out to not have been funded. Maybe he should have known that, but I'm not sure he had visibility into the problem.

I see Fauci as the firefighter who arrives at the scene, hooks up the hoses, and discovers that the hydrants are dry and the city hadn't bothered to tell anyone.

I'm sure it's more complicated than that. He has definitely made some mistakes, but the system which is supposed to back him up has completely failed him and all the rest of us.

[ergocoder]

"I don't regret anything I said then because in the context of the time in which I said it, it was correct. We were told in our task force meetings that we have a serious problem with the lack of PPEs," he said.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-doesnt-regret-advising...

It makes no sense since cloth masks don't cause PPE shortage.

> IIRC, the consensus pre-COVID and post-SARS, was that cloth masks are inferior to N95 masks. When the supply of N95 masks was not considered unreliable, there was no need for public health to think about bandanas.

It's inferior but still better than nothing.

So, you agree that cloth masks are better than nothing.

> In Feb/Mar, before asymptomatic transmission was proven, it was reasonable to not bother suggesting cloth masks,

The precautionary principle 101.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

They should have be cautious first. Like come on, it's beginner's level of crisis management.

They even implied against it (because you would touch your face and etc.)

A tweet from US surgeon general: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/healthcare/2020/03/0...

"They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!"

Why would you say masks are NOT effective? With emphasis on NOT.

Fauci never refuted this tweet at the time, so what were we supposed to think?

> I see Fauci as the firefighter who arrives at the scene, hooks up the hoses, and discovers that the hydrants are dry and the city hadn't bothered to tell anyone.

It's more like he showed up and said water didn't help put out fire. Let's not use water.

He also didn't regret it because, well, we were in the water shortage period.

> He has definitely made some mistakes

A mistake that caused many lives.

He made a bad judgement call. Bad at communication with public. No idea how to manage crisis.

Just say "hey, it looks like a flu. We should be cautious and cover our face with something. Please don't buy n95 because doctors need it".

At the time, I covered my face in public and kept saying masks worked, and I felt like an anti-vaxx for going against "science". What a shit show.

[quesera]

"Masks" meant something different in March than it does now.

Cloth masks were a thing in Asia, but the US had never thought about them much. They were not available for sale.

When Fauci discouraged use of masks among the general public, but implored that they be conserved for medical professionals, he was speaking in the context of PPE. N95 masks, etc.

Sometime in March, people started asking "well do cloth masks work at all"? And there was no consensus answer until (IIRC) early May.

Maybe someone should have said "Hey, we don't know for sure, we've never studied it -- but they use cloth masks in Asia and they have more experience than we do. They certainly can't hurt as long as you recognize clean side/dirty side, and wash them regularly. You can't buy them, but you can make them. Don't make them poorly."

Remember that Fauci was sidelined for a while in there though. And that his job is not public health communications management.

I really don't think you can blame Fauci for the failures here. His messaging, when able to speak, was not that confusing or contradictory. And yet he still got in trouble with the people who wanted him to be less honest. He was simply not able to counter the extreme bloviation and misinformed dishonesty coming from the administration. And he received death threats for trying!

Blame Deborah Birx, a bit, for conflicting signals and bending to pressure. Blame Jerome Adams, for not having the background to separate truth from fiction, and lacking the strength to demand accuracy and clarity. But even those two didn't have much power, their biggest error was lending the appearance of credibility to the broken process which employed them. Blame their boss for having an agenda at odds with direct and honest communication.

Anthony Fauci did not save us, nor did Robert Redfield. We all wish they had. They both spoke honestly when given the chance though, and in a functional government, they (along with the rest of NIAID, CDC, HHS, and OSG) might have given the country a fighting chance.

Or maybe not. Most of the rest of the world is in pretty rough shape too.

[ergocoder]

> Maybe someone should have said "Hey, we don't know for sure, we've never studied it -- but they use cloth masks in Asia and they have more experience than we do

Nah.

Putting any filter between 2 people are going to reduce particle exchange. Even bad filter would do.

Isn't this just physics regardless of whether it's classical or quantum?

Asian countries don't have greater insight. It's common sense. Someone coughs at us. We put anything on our face to reduce the particles reaching us. Somehow you tried to argue that this was a recent scientific discovery.

We can agree to disagree.

The fact remains. Fauci could have easily recommended bandana or any type of face covering. He didn't. He even admitted he lied for the greater good. He didn't even think of bandana. And this is the best person we have in US...

[jussij]

Considering this part of his statement I think his message might have even more subtle than that:

but if health care providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!

I suspect at the time of the statement, health care works where struggle to get PPE, which would not have been helped by the run on masks by the general public.

In that context I see this a plea for the public to understand a mask in the hand of a medical worker is much more valuable than one in the hand of a member of the public. So lets try and help the medical staff before we try and help ourselves.

[nmfisher]

> The Surgeon General, OTOH, was never a person to be taken seriously. But I don't blame Fauci for that.

Why? I'm not from the USA, so obviously I don't understand the specifics of that position.

[quesera]

The US Surgeon General is a political appointee, with a largely ceremonial role and little policy influence.

Some have been better than others, but they mostly serve as a mouthpiece for the administration's agenda as it relates to health-adjacent matters.

As such, when the President does not take a health matter seriously (historically: AIDS, opioids, obesity, guns, tobacco, mental health, drunk driving; newly: COVID-19), the Surgeon General is not to be taken seriously.