Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 373 posts

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#211

Post by j7ake »

wisienkas wrote: post #153
badpun wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an expert, but I believe they stop the droplets, which are vectors for viruses.

It has been proved that most of those masks sold simply aren't closely sewed enough to stop the droplets containing the disease. So in general the mask don't help. Secondly the mask only help avoiding spreading the virus from yourself to other and it doesn't protect from receiving the virus

The relevant question is not whether droplets can bypass a mask or not.

The specific question that is relevant is, given droplet exposure containing COVID, are there any differences in infection rates for people wearing a mask (use different levels of mask protection for comprehensiveness, from bandana to N95) versus without a mask?

A mask can be only 10-20% effective but still show a clinically relevant result. If you think about the effectiveness of washing your hands to prevent getting sick, it is probably a low reduction but it is still highly recommended.

People do not argue against hand washing just because the virus can still get into your system through other means. They support hand washing despite its imperfections.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#212

Post by lolc »

mcsb4 wrote: post #165
wisienkas wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been proved that most of those masks sold simply aren't closely sewed enough to stop the droplets containing the disease. So in general the mask don't help. Secondly the mask only help avoiding spreading the virus from yourself to other and it doesn't protect from receiving the virus

Please stop spreading this false information and have a look at the infection numbers in China. The masks stop droplets coming from your mouth and nose and if everybody wears them, then they are a very effective mean to massively slowing down the spreading of the virus. No, the masks are not 100% virus tight. Yes, they prevent spreading of diseases. That's why they are worn by surgeons. They are 20 cents a piece, tha…

The mask not only keeps airborne droplets in, or out. It keeps the wearer from touching mouth and nose involuntarily. This helps protect against smear infections!

I noticed this when I was wearing one during a flu infection. My fingers were frequently surprised to touch the mask instead of my face, and I went "oh, right, don't do that!"

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#213

Post by bsder »

mcsb4 wrote: post #85

I don't understand why we are not trying to interrupt the transmission vectors with masks and hand sanitizer like the Chinese do. They ramped the daily production from 10M to 100M and even advised the use of make-shift masks. The reaction in the west: masks are not protecting 100% and also we don't have any and we are too lazy to produce them, although they are much cheaper than the economic impact covid-19 has. 1. y…

> 1. you go out, you wear a mask

If you can get a mask.

The mask manufacturers in the West are not going to ramp up without a significant amount of money up front. The last time they did with SARS they almost went bankrupt after it fizzled out and demand collapsed:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/02/15/coronavir...

So, you need the US government to either command or fund the manufacturing ramp up.

Unfortunately, that requires people in charge who actually don't suffer from cranio-rectal impaction.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#214

Post by scotty79 »

lordnacho wrote: post #50
black_puppydog wrote: post #15

I don't agree with the conclusion. We can scale down our economies and still maintain production of essentials by ` `drumroll` ` scaling back shit that nobody needs. Starting with an overblown healthcare admin system in the US, IMHO, but also including less inflammatory non-essential things like yet another range of plastic toys and luxury perfumes and and and. Essentially in this scenario, we should take this as an…

I think you're right that is is an opportunity to think about what we really need done in society, but the implications are simply enormous. One concrete thing that will come into focus, especially in this US election year, is the healthcare system. If the virus overwhelms the capacity in the US, it will be constantly in the news. There's no better use of the attention than to have that debate about how healthcare sh…

> About the BS jobs, yes, there's undoubtedly a lot of those. I think the only way they go is if the crisis hits the economy so hard that many businesses collapse and are rebuilt, without those jobs.

Maybe this will help to introduce basic income and to finally part with the silly notion that to survive you need an excuse of having some job even if that job is manufacturing products and services people don't really need and tricking them into buying those.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#215

Post by Fr0styMatt88 »

scotty79 wrote: post #191
gwd wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't get sick if you aren't exposed. The problem isn't the short-term; the problem is the long term. Are you suggesting the entire world work from home and interact only over the internet for the rest of our lives? One of the biggest questions in this thread is specifically what kind of immunity we can have from the virus. If catching it gives you 10-year immunity, then slowing things down might work. But what…

> Are you suggesting the entire world work from home and interact only over the internet for the rest of our lives? Seems perfectly fine to me. Some essential jobs require manual skills but I think those can be organised to avoid most of the physical human contact. Some can be phase out by more automation. And we have so many inessential jobs in this economy that shedding them might be beneficial to us all. Do we rea…

Not really. The delivery riders, Uber drivers, couriers and postal workers that bring you all that stuff you can order online like food and goods. The people that work maintaining the cables for your ISP (and the technicians in their data centers) that let you work from home in the first place. The people that clean your streets. Ambulance drivers. Taxi drivers. Cooks. The people that collect your garbage. The people that maintain your cities. These are all just off the top of my head.

Really think hard about it; it's pretty easy to take a whole bunch of stuff for granted especially when you work in high-tech areas. I'm extremely fortunate that I can work from home, but what if my fridge breaks down or I just run out of milk and my Internet happens to be down?

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#216

Post by scotty79 »

the_gipsy wrote: post #179
TuringTest wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an alternative model: that people who do nothing productive don't work at all in producing silly products and services, and they can spend their time doing things they enjoy instead. https://harpers.org/archive/1932/10/in-praise-of-idleness/

There's a big difference in producing silly products, and creating silly jobs to keep people busy. I mean that with UBI you can fix the idiocy of creating real fake jobs to keep people busy, but you won't fix people wanting to buy silly things.

> you won't fix people wanting to buy silly things.

If the supply will be lower because people won't need to manufacture them to have an excuse to not starve to death, price of silly things will go up and that does wonders to people's wants for silly things.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#217

Post by scotty79 »

yiyus wrote: post #143
TuringTest wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an alternative model: that people who do nothing productive don't work at all in producing silly products and services, and they can spend their time doing things they enjoy instead. https://harpers.org/archive/1932/10/in-praise-of-idleness/

There are many people who enjoy producing "silly products and services". Eg: many people who are left at home spending time doing what they enjoy will make beer or wine. Some of these beers and wines will be excellent, people will like them, and they will want to pay for them. I understand the motivations for what you propose, but I do not see how it would work in practice before going into full-authoritarian mode.

That's all fine. The problem is when industry does that.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#218

Post by lolc »

sokoloff wrote: post #195
crispyporkbites wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So in general the mask don't help. Is that proven? > Secondly the mask only help avoiding spreading the virus from yourself to other and it doesn't protect from receiving the virus Doesn't this contradict your first statement? In fact the statement contradicts itself, stopping spreading the virus from one person to another by definition protects from receiving the virus.

Not necessarily. If the primary vector is respiration but the reception can be through mucous membranes, then a mask that doesn’t cover the eyes (or doesn’t protect hands which later rub your eyes), then a mask would be more effective on those infected than it would be for those not infected.

As far as I know a mask is more effective to contain when worn by the infected. But that doesn't mean the not-infected (including those who mistakenly think they are not infected!) to not wear one. Because it does protect. Not only from airborne droplets but also from smear infections.

Reducing the likelihood of infection by ten percent can make the difference between eradication and an epidemic.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#219

Post by factsaresacred »

Gupie wrote: post #192
mcsb4 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop spreading this false information and have a look at the infection numbers in China. The masks stop droplets coming from your mouth and nose and if everybody wears them, then they are a very effective mean to massively slowing down the spreading of the virus. No, the masks are not 100% virus tight. Yes, they prevent spreading of diseases. That's why they are worn by surgeons. They are 20 cents a piece, tha…

This is the advise we are getting "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with suspected 2019-nCoV infection." https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2... "If you are not sick, do not buy a face mask. If you have one already and you are well, it is not recommended that you use it." https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/dont-panic-the-compr... Is this…

Not the op, however this advise is misguided.

If you're sick but don't know it, your coughing/breathing is spreading the virus.

So everyone wearing a mask prevents the infected, including those that don't know that they're infected, from spreading the disease.

And for those who are not sick, it may offer small protections.

Tiny downside for a large upside.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#220

Post by f0ok »

Gupie wrote: post #192
mcsb4 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop spreading this false information and have a look at the infection numbers in China. The masks stop droplets coming from your mouth and nose and if everybody wears them, then they are a very effective mean to massively slowing down the spreading of the virus. No, the masks are not 100% virus tight. Yes, they prevent spreading of diseases. That's why they are worn by surgeons. They are 20 cents a piece, tha…

This is the advise we are getting "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with suspected 2019-nCoV infection." https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2... "If you are not sick, do not buy a face mask. If you have one already and you are well, it is not recommended that you use it." https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/dont-panic-the-compr... Is this…

Not directly, but they are stating they are not recommended, when in fact, they help a bit: - wearing something on your face will help you remember not to touch your face. It's not much, but it's something to reduce spread by hand to mouth contact. - if the mask has good filtration (N95+, sealed on the side), it still offers some protection against dropplet. - if the person wearing it is infected but asymptomatic, they will reduce, at least a bit, the spread (e.g. when sneezing), as long as they're not wearing one with a valve.

So, some protection is better than no protection. Consequently, It's difficult for me to understand why discouraging people from using face masks is a good idea.

Use it properly and keep social distancing, while regularly cleaning your hands.

Post reply on HN