Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by timr 1774 days ago
Well, any rational conversation about Japan has to start with the observation that cases are at an all-time high right now:

https://www.asahi.com/topics/word/%E3%82%B3%E3%83%AD%E3%83%8...

I don't think changing rates of masking can explain that change.

> Anecdotal, how do you explain the non existing flue season (last autumn ) and the low incidences in Japan? We got higher rates during the Olympic.

I haven't seen any data on flu during the olympics, so I can't comment on that. Covid cases, of course, were shooting up long before the first athletes even arrived in Japan (see above).

To answer your question, nobody knows why flu "disappeared" during the last year. My hypothesis is a combination of two things:

1) it didn't disappear, it just spread less due to to the dramatic reduction in international travel (plus maybe closure of schools).

2) we stopped testing for flu at rates necessary to detect it. Our prior surveillance system for influenza was pretty limited, and most of it switched to Covid in 2020.

In general, I think people fixate on masks far too much, because they're visible. Even in Japan, what qualifies as a mask would make Americans in the "mask compliant" cities laugh out loud. I routinely see people wearing these on Instagram and on television:

https://www.superdelivery.com/product_image/812/8/8128738_10...

2 comments

... the increase in incidences are coinciding with early travel and reducing the state of emergency related to the olympic. I work at a place that housed one of the teams, and the incidence increased around 1-2 weeks after some people arrived.

NHK made a lot of efforts like the one bellow: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/backstories/1247/

Check the video,I would say masks help. It's basic physics ...

it's similar to the seat belt and car discussion. It's debatable how much they help (and they might have increased the number of accidents initially), yet they help. Statistics is hard.

> Check the video,I would say masks help. It's basic physics

Masks leak. Airflow seeks the path of least resistance. Also basic physics. People are not mannequins in a fume hood with scrap of cloth glued to their slobberhole.

I don't think anyone is disputing the idea that if you could somehow hermetically seal off everyone's face holes, you'd stop the spread of a respiratory virus. But we can't, and we don't, so the question becomes: in the real world (i.e. not a mannequin in a lab), does it make a difference?

All of the real-world evidence on the question is mixed, at best.

what is the risk of wearing a mask? that you look silly?

the real world evidence is mixed, yes.

People are not mannequins, people die. If a simple action of mine, that might make me look silly, might save some lives (might, I don't know, yet from annexdotes countries that had no problem with wearing masks and other measures faired better) I will do what these countries did (and also wear a mask). It's rational compassion for me.

You might say, I don't care (and science might prove you right or wrong after a long while), yet consider the potential cost if you are proven wrong ... Looking silly versus potentially killing people ... The evidence is not in, and it depends on what you value more ;)

It's your own choice. For me I decided to wear a mask in public, do social distancing and get vaccinated. I think these are reasonable things to ask from people. You don't seem to think that.

> what is the risk of wearing a mask? that you look silly?

Fortunately, "lack of silliness" is not the standard of evidence for a medical intervention.

There are a great many things that we might impose on others that might have some impact. There are, in fact, an infinite number of these things.

Your desire to do these things "just in case" does not justify their imposition on other people. But more importantly: we've had a long time to study this intervention now. Perhaps it's time to gather some actual evidence that it works?

After all, it's not just the question of whether or not I want to do it -- it's the question of whether or not huge number of people are convinced that they're protecting themselves, and somehow behaving differently out of a misguided sense of protection. That matters quite a bit.

> It's rational compassion for me.

No, without evidence, it's just a guess.

Wearing a mask is a medical intervention for you??

wearing a mask is not about protecting you, it's protecting other people. If you don't value other people's lives, don't wear one it won't help you personally.

Ok ... so where is the evidence that they don't work?

Current scientific consensus is on my side of the debate:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8

If you know better, do the experiments and the analysis, get it peer-reviewed and we can talk again.

If you are ok with the consequences that you might kill people, don't wear a mask. Fine with me. Just don't tell anybody afterwards that you didn't know and that it was just a guess.

i feel this discussion as tedious as the discussion about vaccinations: https://twitter.com/nathanTbernard/status/142511666690879488...

People are no mannequins ... people die.

> Ok ... so where is the evidence that they don't work?

I provided you with the link to the WHO meta-analysis of all research literature surrounding masks prior to the pandemic. Here it is again:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

This covers 172 publications on masks and disease leading up to the pandemic. It is far more comprehensive than any particular paper or editorial you cherry-pick to support your arguments.

The best you can possibly say is that there is poor evidence supporting a small marginal effect. And that's if you combine all of the data in an illogical way and ignore that cloth masks and respirators are not the same, and that n95 masks in hospitals are not at all the same as bandanas in the subway. If you limit the argument to the question of non-respirator masks outside hospitals, there's no supporting evidence at all.

Spamming the comments with links to the same two papers from 2020 -- neither of which are good (see my other response) -- is not a rebuttal. The only high-quality paper on masks in 2020 was the Danish mask study, which was a well-controlled, high-quality RCT, and failed to find evidence for a protective effect:

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

Despite exasperating claims to the contrary, it is unlikely to be true that masks are magical one-way valves, with protective effect in one direction but not the other -- particularly if the virus is spread by aerosols, which are not blocked by poorly fitting masks.

here's a newer paper:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24115-7

(no evidence ... just guesses ... just nature level publication guesses ... probably all wrong)

"So don't understand why actual reality contradicts this paper."

This is similar as saying ... It had the biggest blizzard last winter in Texas, that's why Global Warming is a hoax.

Where is this paper wrong? Maybe you spotted something that the peer reviewers didn't.

Also you should submit your "scientific" observations of Texas ... because it's real reality (not science ... who needs the scientific method, when we have your observations).

The entire state of Texas lifted all Covid restrictions around March? Had only 16% vaccination rates and had record low levels of Covid infections for 6 months up until recently with apparently the Delta variant.

So don't understand why actual reality contradicts this paper.

If you tell me that millions of Texans followed social distancing rules on their own without a citation, it will be humorous.

anything that interfere with droplet dispersion is better than nothing ... no? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwOwMsCc6NA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAvO_QdO9eM

Seems basic to me ... If the droplets from me don't reach to the first person in the cinema I cannot infect them.

> If the droplets from me don't reach to the first person in the cinema I cannot infect them.

It would be nice if that was true. In a small study here in Sweden they tested for covid particles in the AC system, and found particles in every single place they tested. This in a major hospital where everyone are wearing masks, and where the AC is located in the ceiling. The finding was not what the researcher was expecting, especially not in the AC system located on the roof.

How much interference a mask has is determined by the leak rating, but for most surgical masks there are no protection for the finer droplets in coughs and sneezes.

In a similar style, people though initially that bath houses and saunas would be safe against covid because the large droplets in the humid air would drop quickly to the ground. Later it was generally agreed here that the conclusion was incorrect and all public bath houses and saunas closed. Like with masks, humid air might be better than nothing but you really do not want to be near a person who are sick unless you got yourself an air filter and face shield.

Yes, that's the point masks are better than nothing. They might reduce the likelihood (without much of a negative impact). That's why we should wear them.

A vaccination also just reduces the likelihood you get covid. People can still get it and still spread it, even if they are vaccinated. It just reduces the likelihood and masks might do that as well ...

Yes, through masks don't reduce the likelihood of infection in the same way like vaccinations. The vaccination significant reduce infection rate for the person who takes it. Any secondary effect on other people is the result of the vaccinated person not being sick. Mask on other hand might in a limited way reduce spread if the person who wear it is sick. Masks without intake filters has zero effect on the person who wears the mask.

Vaccinations also have requirements with generally 90%+ protection, while masks has anything from 0 to 90% effectiveness in filtering breath emissions. As a effective measure against covid, vaccinations are a much more effective and powerful tool.

After two years and in my experience, you can't have large gatherings and expect a low risks. Neither vaccines nor mask nor the combination of both can produce enough of an defense. 2m distancing, washing hands, and keeping human gatherings inside to an absolute minimum is the only way, and then follow up with mass vaccinations. I don't think given current scientific knowledge that one can cheat that process.

Science is the history of people debunking ideas that "seem basic" to other people.

Those are called "hypotheses", and they're great. The next step is to find evidence that proves the hypothesis...and that's where we're stuck here.

Science is the history of people seeing something basic and getting told by others that it's not true ... E.g. the earth is round. Yet, You can never prove a hypothesis just present more and more evidence.

My point: it does not hurt me to wear a mask and it might help people, so I will do it. It seems also that scientists who know more about this than me, support this idea. They might be wrong, yet even if they are the negative consequences are so low (I wore a mask for a couple of days ... ) that for me it's worth it.

When I hear Rand Paul, I hear the smuggness of "I know masks don't work" and sorry but we don't know that ... Saying this right now, is showing me that he does not understand science (we don't know, they might help) and that he does not have any compassion.

Fauci seems to have the better track record (seeing how he dealt with AIDS).

Not driving a car might help people also.

Not leaving your house also might help people.

If it 'might help people' why not either of those options?

Finally we are getting somewhere. I didn't drive a car and I was not often leaving the house in the last year :)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24115-7

Good you should continue to do that!
Masks work in healthcare settings due to proper mask usage and training.

The problem is at the community level.

The current world mask usage is: "Wear a filth rag on your face until the waiter brings the breadsticks".

This could actually be doing more harm than good.