SKIP THE FACE MASKS! ....... Ummmm........ HANG ON! U-TURN?

[oldbadger]

I think you are absolutely right. I bought 8 of them back in the beginning of Feb. They are firm and reusable, the outside can be wiped off with disinfectant after use. My daughter is a home health homemaker and does all the grocery shopping for her elder clients, she is in the grocery stores everyday. For anyone who worked in the health care field masks were common sense. I believe if everyone wore one we might not be in the position we are now. Massachusetts has had an impossible situation of being outbid by the federal government to by enough masks. Well they will be arriving today from China thanks to the NE Patriots who purchased them and flew their planes to bring them back. Go Pats!

You are wise and think ahead, that is obvious.
I'm pretty slow, but my wife is red hot at seeing flak coming and so we were ready by mid Feb.

 

[HonestJoe]

"There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there's some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly," Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO health emergencies program, said at a media briefing in Geneva, Switzerland, on Monday.

I see absolutely nothing wrong or misleading in that statement. I'm also not aware of any specific evidence supporting the mass use of masks (some proposed correlations but no specific evidence) and I've personally seen evidence of how failing to follow the correct procedures with PPE can lead to greater infection risks.

If someone near you in a supermarket sneezed, would you prefer:

a) both you and they were wearing masks
b) neither you nor they were wearing masks

I'd prefer nobody was sick. We can't make things happen by just preferring them.

The national and international level recommendations about about specific examples or trying to meet ever special circumstance - that is impossible. They're about presenting a clear and simple message that the vast majority of the public (remembering 50% are below average intelligence ) can easily taken on board and that will lead to the most people taking the best measures across the board to minimise the impact of the pandemic. That remains a much, much more complicated question than "masks or no masks".

 

[oldbadger]

The physical laws of the universe support the idea that lightly porous, dry-material face-masks WOULD, indeed work. The virus survives any trek through the air within small particles of fluid. If you are wearing a face-mask and upon inhalation these particles come in contact with the dry material of the face-mask, they are absorbed and "stuck" away from your mouth/nose, and ultimately away from your lungs. And as others have stated, upon breathing out the same shielding principle applies to help keep any infection you may already have from hitting the air.

Anyone who denies that this simple principle could increase your chances of avoiding infection are not thinking.

Hear hear!

 

[MNoBody]

Imperfect =/= ineffective

right, so from all of this likely some industrial sector will make windfall profits since quality is costly and cheap means ineffective and likely useless....more likely a middleman hemorrhage of cash, given the billing practices [hundreds even thousands times markup] which is out of control as the bankrupted medical systems of north america clearly show...but lets keep overcharging for such things and keep that industry just the way it has evolved [seems people are not too disturbed by any of that whole thing for the past half century i have been watching it...or ever disturbed enough for it to have mattered]

 

[oldbadger]

Yes, women with good eyes can look quite alluring, it must be said.

Arab women seem to devote quite a bit of attention to eye make up. Funny, that.

And ankles!
A Muslim colleague of mine reckoned that his grandad could pick the lookers just by sight of their ankles. Although howvhe then got em to take off their burkhas I can't remember.

 

[oldbadger]

I mean...'criminally negligent at best'??
Big call there.

I'll stand by the advice given to me on this by my wife, since she works in health.

I hope your wife and all other medical workers keep safe at this time.
Can't see the bloody enemy, is the dreadful risk.

About your post, I feel sure that officials would not have knowingly deceived us all, they just thought masks were not helpful, but if they had done that instead of requisitioning all from retail and then advising us to wear scarfs and make masks...... see the difference?

I touch my face all the blooming time, and so used isopropyl alc regularly, but would wear a mask in a shop now.

Our postmen started wearing masks just today.

 

[exchemist]

And ankles!
A Muslim colleague of mine reckoned that his grandad could pick the lookers just by sight of their ankles. Although howvhe then got em to take off their burkhas I can't remember.

I remember a Turkish woman I met once in Shell, who had the most beautiful feet. I don't normally notice feet much, but hers were exquisite.

Just goes to show how many parts of the body can be sources of attraction, I suppose - and how women manage to find a way through, in spite of all the attempts of the men to stop them!

 

[Augustus]

I see absolutely nothing wrong or misleading in that statement. I'm also not aware of any specific evidence supporting the mass use of masks (some proposed correlations but no specific evidence) and I've personally seen evidence of how failing to follow the correct procedures with PPE can lead to greater infection risks.

The biggest danger is people who do not know they are sick spreading the virus.

You think it is correct and accurate to say that "there is no evidence that asymptomatic carriers wearing masks would help reduce transmission?"

Remember, they believe people who know they have the virus should wear masks.

Also do you believe being exposed to the virus while wearing a mask is likely, on average, to be more risky than being exposed to the virus while not wearing a mask?

Remember, they believe someone caring for a sick person should wear a mask.


"No evidence that masks provide potential benefit"

Hmmm...

I'd prefer nobody was sick. We can't make things happen by just preferring them.

The national and international level recommendations about about specific examples or trying to meet ever special circumstance - that is impossible. They're about presenting a clear and simple message that the vast majority of the public (remembering 50% are below average intelligence ) can easily taken on board and that will lead to the most people taking the best measures across the board to minimise the impact of the pandemic. That remains a much, much more complicated question than "masks or no masks"

I'll take the evasion to mean "of course I'd prefer us both to be wearing masks, silly"

What is the evidence that masks offer no potential benefit when worn on a mass scale though? What is the rational, evidence based argument that says we are better off without them?

 

[Augustus]

likely useless.

Unless proven otherwise, the starting position should be that they offer some degree of protection because we have a long history of using masks for this very reason.

 

[Twilight Hue]

SKIP THE FACE MASKS! ....... Ummmm........ HANG ON! U-TURN?
Back in Febnruary and early March the standard response to face masks was that they are ineffective for the public. I expect that these ideas were born from Leader's comments such as 'Skip the face masks'. Here are just two examples of February and early March opinions about them..... these are not links:-
------------------------------------------
Face masks won't help you avoid illness, so why wear them ...www.businessinsider.com › face-masks-wont-help-avoi..........................28 Feb 2020
- -----------------------------------------
3 Mar 2020 - Medical experts explain why you should wash your hands instead of getting a face mask to protect against coronavirus. ...www.inquirer.com › health › coronavirus › face-masks...
-------------------------------------------
And so we have been watching the people of several Western countries out and about, mostly without face masks.................
...and now, in recent hours and days, we hear the the World Health Organisation is reviewing its advice about face masks. I snatched a couple of similar articles ......if you 'google' face masks you'll see a range of articles, I expect.
---------------------------------------------------
MDH: Wearing homemade facemasks in public "Not a bad idea"
KARE11.com-3 hours ago
MDH: Wearing homemade facemasks in public "Not a bad idea". How masks could help and what you need to know if you want to make your own ...
------------------------------------------------------
Trump backs Americans covering faces as task force debates ...
ABC News-14 hours ago
Trump backs Americans covering faces as task force debates mask ... "It's not a bad idea, at least for a period of time" to cover your face when ...
---------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION:-
Is this one reason why Western pandemic graphs differ significantly from Korean, where everybody wears face masks?

With the shortage being the obvious reasons, there's also two types of common face masks. One keeps the virus from coming out of you but doesn't stop it from coming in, and the other one prevents the virus from coming into the person which is the one healthcare professionals predominantly use. That's from what I hear.

 

[MNoBody]

Unless proven otherwise, the starting position should be that they offer some degree of protection because we have a long history of using masks for this very reason.

ok, caveat, individual results may vary, no warranties expressed nor implied...use at your own risk.

 

[MNoBody]

it broaches the same matter the walnut case illustrated with alleged 'health claims' made and a guv-dept taking them through some due processing which left them fleeced, so, lots of precedent

 

[HonestJoe]

And if face masks were known to be useful for all, then to deceive the entire population would have been criminal, not clever.

Masks aren't "known to be useful for all". We know they would be beneficial for some, harmful for others and make no difference to others still. We don't know what the balance between those three groups would be and that could shift massively for different times, places and people. Nobody was trying to deceive anyone. They were trying to achieve the best outcome for the entire population. Even if they were mistaken, that doesn't make it deception.

 

[oldbadger]

With the shortage being the obvious reasons, there's also two types of common face masks. One keeps the virus from coming out of you but doesn't stop it from coming in, and the other one prevents the virus from coming into the person which is the one healthcare professionals predominantly use. That's from what I hear.

The World Health Organisation is reviewing it's previous advice.

Today our local postmen were instructed to wear masks, and did.

 

[stvdv]

One member said that any who would wear a mask ate idiots.

This new initiative could be a complete turn around.

Our postmen started wearing masks, ordinary face masks..... today!!!

I was a bit late ordering face mask. Got my pack from China 3 hours ago

For the time being, I had this one

 

[oldbadger]

Masks aren't "known to be useful for all". We know they would be beneficial for some, harmful for others and make no difference to others still. We don't know what the balance between those three groups would be and that could shift massively for different times, places and people. Nobody was trying to deceive anyone. They were trying to achieve the best outcome for the entire population. Even if they were mistaken, that doesn't make it deception.

IF!!!!
I wrote IF !!!

And the WHO is reviewing it's previous guidance

 

[MNoBody]

honestly though, they should have the same warranty a pack of trojans has.....

 

[oldbadger]

I was a bit late ordering face mask. Got my pack from China 3 hours ago

For the time being, I had this one

View attachment 38451

My goodness!
You'll pull all the girls in that gear.!!

 

[HonestJoe]

You think it is correct and accurate to say that "there is no evidence that asymptomatic carriers wearing masks would help reduce transmission?"

Regarding COVID-19 specifically, I actually doubt there is any evidence. Regardless, that isn't the statement we're talking about. It was "we're not aware of any specific evidence supporting the mass use of masks".

Also do you believe being exposed to the virus while wearing a mask is likely, on average, to be more risky than being exposed to the virus while not wearing a mask?

If you've been exposed, whether you're wearing a mask didn't make any difference. An individual wearing a mask may well prevent them being infected in a specific situation. Yet again though, we're not talking about individuals people and situations, we're talking about the entire population indefinitly.

"No evidence that masks provide potential benefit"

No, again; "no evidence supporting the mass use of masks". Who is misrepresenting the facts now?

I'll take the evasion to mean "of course I'd prefer us both to be wearing masks, silly"

You can take it as an irrelevant question. Would you prefer I had a supply of masks or my doctor friend working in the local A&E having a supply of masks? We can play silly games all we want, it doesn't make any difference to the big picture.

What is the evidence that masks offer no potential benefit when worn on a mass scale though? What is the rational, evidence based argument that says we are better off without them?

I won't quote the statement yet again, you can just scroll up. Nobody said there is evidence against there being benefit.

There is certainly evidence of a shortage of supply that was already making it difficult for medical professionals. There is a logical concern that an official recommendation for everyone to wear masks in public places could easily trigger panic buying (regardless of any restrictions put in place), making that problem much worse. There are also logical concerns (and some related evidence) that wearing masks can subconsciously lead to people taking less care with the other infection control measures, potentially contradicting the benefits or even overcoming them.

The bottom line is that nobody can know for certain and the people making the decisions had to collate a whole mess of incomplete and mixed evidence and information to come up with a viable policy. Even with the second guessing happening now, based on additional information (and a whole load of speculation), that doesn't mean their decisions at the time were wrong. It certainly doesn't justify condemning or insulting them now.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

So why, then, have so many medical people been sceptical of their value, do you think?

From what I have read, the problem with most masks is they confer a false sense of security, while actually admitting plenty of viruses. This seems to be for two reasons: (1) they are a poor fit round the face, so leak badly at the edges and (2) they do nothing to prevent entry via the eyes. So as a means of protection against infection, they may be worse than useless, if people wrongly feel protected by them and starting using the Underground again, for example.

Where I agree you may have a point is that they may work better to stop an infected person passing it on, since most of that seems to happen via aerosols from the mouth, much of which might indeed be trapped by even a fairly poor fitting mask.

Perhaps, then, the calculus is shifting, now that a significant proportion of the population is already infected but may not have realised it yet.

Note that I stated, specifically: "could increase your chances of avoiding infection" - I did not (and would not) state that it makes you invulnerable to infection. There is probably nothing short of life in a bubble that is going to do that.

The reality is, if I were even to breathe instead through my jacket in the crook of my arm, this alone would also provide an amount of protection from contracting the virus from moisture particles in the air around me. It is a simple matter of providing a filter - a dry filter, within which moist particles can become trapped. Any amount of filter like this decreases your chance of infection. Anyone who says otherwise is stuck on the hyperbolic - i.e. "IT DOESN'T PROTECT YOU FROM EVERYTHING!" This is an unrealistic expectation, and misses the point entirely.

Why are we all staying home and going out only when necessary? Because it decreases the chances that we will contract the virus. Does it protect us from the virus entirely? No. So why are we doing it? Of course the answer is completely obvious, and I have now stated it several times in this post alone.