U.S. to close..

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

I agree with most of this, except that I think the authorities made a big mistake not leveling with people about their initial position advising against mask usage. Rather than being truthful about the legitimate need to preserve available supplies for health care workers and first responders, they also quite publicly claimed mask use by the general populace to actually be unhealthy. Whether their motivation was justified or not, the ensuing about face when supplies became more available sowed some doubt and fueled the ensuing fire from those who were perhaps already inclined not to trust the medical experts or the govt they worked for.

I don't think that's the full picture.

The initial advice to the public was "don't be buying up and hoarding all the N95 masks; it takes a little skill to gain their protective benefit; anything less and you won't be protected... in fact - improper or careless mask handling can increase your risk of infection" (eg can be unhealthy). All this is still true, btw. And of course "we really need current PPE stocks for the frontline people". They were upfront with that, as per the above link.

The later advice came about from thinking about how we can start opening up, and the realization that asymptomatic people will go out without knowing they're spreaders, but if any such people wear a simple cloth mask, they won't be expelling as much virus at others. And the only way this will happen is if everyone wears a simple cloth mask when around others or in enclosed shared spaces. There was no claim that these simple masks would substantially protect the wearer.

So, calling that later advice an "about-face" is somewhat unfair, and an 'alternate fact' that's being pushed by those inclined to find fault with the government response, as you state.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I don't think that's the full picture.

The initial advice to the public was "don't be buying up and hoarding all the N95 masks; it takes a little skill to gain their protective benefit; anything less and you won't be protected... in fact - improper or careless mask handling can increase your risk of infection" (eg can be unhealthy). All this is still true, btw. And of course "we really need current PPE stocks for the frontline people". They were upfront with that, as I recall.

The later advice came about from thinking about how we can start opening up, and the realization that asymptomatic people will go out without knowing they're spreaders, but if any such people wear a simple cloth mask, they won't be expelling as much virus at others. And the only way this will happen is if everyone wears a simple cloth mask when around others or in enclosed shared spaces. There was no claim that these simple masks would substantially protect the wearer.

So, calling that later advice an "about-face" is somewhat unfair, and an 'alternate fact' that's being pushed by those inclined to find fault with the government response, as you state.

I recall the initial advice from Fauci and the experts against mask usage to have been quite a bit stronger than this, and based more on concrete health concerns than those that you cite (along with very legitimate supply concerns). Possible contamination from the mask itself, more face touching when adjusting, overconfidence in its protective abilities so may thwart social distancing, etc. But perhaps "about-face" is unfair, maybe more like inconsistency (actual and perceived). And of course the messaging was not exactly consistent from administration officials as we know, including the big guy. Personally, I thought (and still think) all the angst over mask usage was (and is) ridiculous. I mean, of all the restrictions, hardships, incapacitation, death, and other adversities people have had to deal with, I find it hard to fathom why this comparatively innocuous one would be so onerous for some, no matter how effective or ineffective they may believe it to be.

[Yihang]

Hate to say it but the advice to wear cloth is still pretty bad advice. Next to useless. Should just make sure surgical masks are widely available. In Beijing there are machines that dispense single use surgical masks and you can't get into the subway without one. And DH has said N95 is available everywhere in europe.

This to be honest is stupidity. Fashionable stupidity.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Yihang

Hate to say it but the advice to wear cloth is still pretty bad advice. Next to useless. Should just make sure surgical masks are widely available. In Beijing there are machines that dispense single use surgical masks and you can't get into the subway without one. And DH has said N95 is available everywhere in europe.

This to be honest is stupidity. Fashionable stupidity.

Maybe so, but aesthetics count. Seriously, I've read such critiques before but why aren't the experts advising on this? Or are they but we're not listening??

[Yihang]

Originally Posted by Exile

Maybe so, but aesthetics count. Seriously, I've read such critiques before but why aren't the experts advising on this? Or are they but we're not listening??

Well the CDC says cloth masks should only be used when surgical ones are not available. But why is it unavailable. Probably because no one is going to make money out of it...

With cloth masks standards and certifications goes out the window.

If you care enough to wear a mask, a surgical one should be easily available to you.

By even suggesting home made cloth masks the CDC is confusing the **** outof everyone....again.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I don't think that's the full picture.

The initial advice to the public was "don't be buying up and hoarding all the N95 masks; it takes a little skill to gain their protective benefit; anything less and you won't be protected... in fact - improper or careless mask handling can increase your risk of infection" (eg can be unhealthy). All this is still true, btw. And of course "we really need current PPE stocks for the frontline people". They were upfront with that, as per the above link.

The later advice came about from thinking about how we can start opening up, and the realization that asymptomatic people will go out without knowing they're spreaders, but if any such people wear a simple cloth mask, they won't be expelling as much virus at others. And the only way this will happen is if everyone wears a simple cloth mask when around others or in enclosed shared spaces. There was no claim that these simple masks would substantially protect the wearer.

So, calling that later advice an "about-face" is somewhat unfair, and an 'alternate fact' that's being pushed by those inclined to find fault with the government response, as you state.

No. You seem to be missing a few important details surrounding this massive early public health policy failure in the US. Exile is exactly correct. The early US government message was clear: masks are not effective. The about-face over this is simply obvious now, as the wear-a-mask message is everywhere. You can debate the motives all you want but you cannot claim that these quotes are "alternative facts"...

Dr. Jerome Adams, US Surgeon General, Tweeting on February 29, 2020:
"Seriously people - STOP BUYING MASKS!
They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus."
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...ace-masks.html

Dr. Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 60 Minutes Interview, March 8, 2020
"Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks."
"There's no reason to be walking around with a mask"
https://youtu.be/PRa6t_e7dgI

[goboatingnow]

I think worldwide the mask message changed. But then much advice around COVID was changed as the pandemic developed

So what. Who said advice has to be consistent. The message changed over time based on what was happening on the ground

Mask wearing advice tends to have been modified because of the apparent success of many mask wearing nations early on in the pandemic , in Europe the Czech Republic was held up as a poster boy.

Hence mask advice began to morph from pure science based advice to “ look at what they are doing )

The second wave has largely shown mask wearing is as expected, largely useless and certainly here advice has largely remained static. ( even though many businesses have made such wearing mandatory even though it’s not a legal requirement )

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

. . . mask wearing. Hand hygiene etc are all ancillary minor measures, that’s not to say they don’t have a small part to play but it’s not the major effect on the spread ( nor does anyone claim it is )

Some do believe that masking can be a major factor in controlling the epidemic. I can't prove it, and the science is somewhat inconclusive so doesn't entirely back me up, but I guess that masking with a high compliance rate combined with social distancing could have one of the biggest effects on the rate of spread.


We made a big deal out of hand hygiene at the beginning of the pandemic because many other diseases spread by fomites via hands. From my reading, there is practically no evidence that any material amount of spread of this virus is happening via hands. So hand hygiene MIGHT not be doing any good at all. But hand hygiene is so easy, and it's SUCH a good habit for any of a number of other reasons, that surely it's a really good idea to keep it up.

[dwedeking2]

Am I understanding this correctly? We were told that we had to get the vaccine to stop the disease. Yet we now find that the vaccine doesn't stop the spreading the disease but only the disease showing symptoms to the one getting the vaccine. So the "vaccine passports" for travel, work, inclusion into society (as Mike puts it) are a non-starter. There is very little benefit to those that aren't at risk (front line health care workers, elderly, and those already with serious health issues). I'm at almost zero risk from the disease itself, so the vaccine is almost useless for me (and with a risk of serious side effects I'll not be taking it).



I'm starting to think that the lockdowns, travel restrictions, etc will never go away. The goal posts to this fight just keep being moved. And the powers to be wonder why they are getting pushback?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I think worldwide the mask message changed. But then much advice around COVID was changed as the pandemic developed

So what. Who said advice has to be consistent. The message changed over time based on what was happening on the ground

The message changed because supply lines were restored and mass mask buying was no longer threatening the availbility of PPE to health care workers. The advice to not buy masks was not because masks are ineffective (even if they are), but because supplies were threatened.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

. . . Mask wearing advice tends to have been modified because of the apparent success of many mask wearing nations early on in the pandemic , in Europe the Czech Republic was held up as a poster boy.


Hence mask advice began to morph from pure science based advice to “ look at what they are doing )

The second wave has largely shown mask wearing is as expected, largely useless and certainly here advice has largely remained static. ( even though many businesses have made such wearing mandatory even though it’s not a legal requirement )

Is that true? Do you have sources for masks being "largely useless"?



I've read a few studies and they go both ways. I wasn't aware that it is generally thought that masks are "useless", but I'm glad to be educated.

[Mike OReilly]

Yes, public health measures have evolved over time as we collectively learn more about this novel, meaning "new", virus. Initial recommendations around masks have changed. And that's a good thing. That's how science works, and is in contrast to those operating on tribal beliefs where evidence doesn't matter.

But the core principles of how to limit virus transmission remain the same. Physical distancing has always been recommendation #1. All other actions such as hand washing or mask wearing, are secondary defenses. But they all function around the same principle of creating a barrier to transmission.

This is why in societies which can act collectively, either through voluntary actions or coercive demands, spread has been better contained. In societies which have a hard time being "their brother's keeper" have done poorly.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

Am I understanding this correctly? We were told that we had to get the vaccine to stop the disease. Yet we now find that the vaccine doesn't stop the spreading the disease but only the disease showing symptoms to the one getting the vaccine.

This is not "what we now find." As far as I've read from the research so far, the question remains inconclusive. We don't know if, or more likely how much, the vaccine actually helps kill the SARS-CoV-2 virus. But it still helps prevent the onset of Covid-19 (which is the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2). And therefore it definitely limits transmission.

If you're not coughing and sneezing and producing all that lovely mucus, then you are less likely to be spreading the virus. So of course it will help prevent transmission. And it is still a benefit to everyone -- not just front line workers.

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

I'm at almost zero risk from the disease itself, so the vaccine is almost useless for me (and with a risk of serious side effects I'll not be taking it).

There is no research I'm aware of that suggests you would be "almost at zero risk." Unless you are already self-isolating, your risk is far from zero.

As for the risk of serious side effects, please point to the research which says they exist. I've not seen this yet in the reports or monitoring or the science.

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

I'm starting to think that the lockdowns, travel restrictions, etc will never go away. The goal posts to this fight just keep being moved. And the powers to be wonder why they are getting pushback?

I fear this as well. As I've said from the outset, I am very concerned about the lessons "the powers that be" are learning. And I don't just mean governments. But in our already increasingly authoritarian "free" societies, power is already far too concentrated. And power rarely gives up power.

So yes, I'm with you on this.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The message changed because supply lines were restored and mass mask buying was no longer threatening the availbility of PPE to health care workers. The advice to not buy masks was not because masks are ineffective (even if they are), but because supplies were threatened.






Is that true? Do you have sources for masks being "largely useless"?



I've read a few studies and they go both ways. I wasn't aware that it is generally thought that masks are "useless", but I'm glad to be educated.

The supply of masks was never actually threatened largely because the public had little access to health orientated PPE. here mask advice to the public was not based on ppe shortages ( the gov flew 60 dedicated flights to China back to back to bring in medical grade ppe , though several shipments were rejected )

The shortages were in civilian supplies of N95 or similar masks , hence the advice to make your own.

Health ppe shortages and civilian ppe shortages were separate issues.

Initial health advice was that masks were ineffective largely based on health officials stating that most civilian users would wear them incorrectly ,

Over time that balance of judgement has changed , with certain health advice suggesting they like hand hygiene can “ play a part “ in reducing exposure largely by the “ my mask protects you “ approach

This is not to say public health advice is consistent , in fact there have been significant criticisms advanced that it has been very inconsistent

For example mask wearing is compulsory in shops here ( no actual penalties ) , but in fact normal retail ships have had very very little evidence of covid infections amongst staff. This was before mask wearing was compulsory

I do notice here that other then shops and public transport , not much more is being said about masks. Compliance where stated , is very very high , but people don’t fuss of the odd person hasnt a mask on , out in my rural hinterland , there’s little mask wearing in farmers supply chains , rural timber merchants etc.

As to there lack of effectiveness , there is the cdc study , quoted several posts up, that’s shows tests in relation to influenza were largely ineffective largely due to incorrect usage issues.

Again , I think social distance , travel and crowd prevention are the key weapons , minor stuff like hand hygiene , surface disinfecting and masks are fine , but have minor benefits

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

So what. Who said advice has to be consistent. The message changed over time based on what was happening on the ground

Maybe because if you give inconsistent responses, people stop believing what you say.

Nothing changed on the ground. The science didn't change. Cloth masks were always easy to fashion. It would have been easy to prohibit sale of N95 masks to non-medical institutions if supply was the concern.

Might want to go read "the boy who cried wolf".

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The supply of masks was never actually threatened largely because the public had little access to health orientated PPE. here mask advice to the public was not based on ppe shortages ( the gov flew 60 dedicated flights to China back to back to bring in medical grade ppe , though several shipments were rejected )

The shortages were in civilian supplies of N95 or similar masks , hence the advice to make your own.

Health ppe shortages and civilian ppe shortages were separate issues.

Initial health advice was that masks were ineffective largely based on health officials stating that most civilian users would wear them incorrectly ,

Over time that balance of judgement has changed , with certain health advice suggesting they like hand hygiene can “ play a part “ in reducing exposure largely by the “ my mask protects you “ approach

This is not to say public health advice is consistent , in fact there have been significant criticisms advanced that it has been very inconsistent

For example mask wearing is compulsory in shops here ( no actual penalties ) , but in fact normal retail ships have had very very little evidence of covid infections amongst staff. This was before mask wearing was compulsory

I do notice here that other then shops and public transport , not much more is being said about masks. Compliance where stated , is very very high , but people don’t fuss of the odd person hasnt a mask on , out in my rural hinterland , there’s little mask wearing in farmers supply chains , rural timber merchants etc.

As to there lack of effectiveness , there is the cdc study , quoted several posts up, that’s shows tests in relation to influenza were largely ineffective largely due to incorrect usage issues.

Again , I think social distance , travel and crowd prevention are the key weapons , minor stuff like hand hygiene , surface disinfecting and masks are fine , but have minor benefits

Interesting, thank you.


My hunch is that masks can be more significant than you say here, but that's just a hunch, so for what little it may be worth.