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

Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

med.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 235 posts

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#201

Post by chitowneats »

gotoeleven wrote: post #76
stolenmerch wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The great incoherent idiocy of anti-* Americans on the issue of masks has always been that they say "cloth masks are ineffective" and propose a solution of "do nothing" instead of "get effective masks." I think the "no nothing" solution has more to do with a desire to return to normal than it is a refusal to "get effective masks" and just wear them forever or until some agency says not to anymore. There is a valid…

Wearing a proper mask that actually substantially reduces the chance of contracting or spreading covid is uncomfortable. As many of us have been saying from the beginning (including the CDC initially!) the cloth masks are just the medical equivalent of TSA security theater. Right now they just function as a little badge to indicate which "team" you're on.

I cannot understand why this is being downvoted. We would have all been wearing N95's long ago if they weren't difficult for frontline workers to use 8 hours a day. People care about their own health by and large. They will use reasonable strategies for mitigation and reject those that are cumbersome.

The people pushing N95 mask requirements are not the same people required to wear them 40 hours a week. The people pushing non-N95 mask requirements are confused about the effectiveness of non-N95 "masks".

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#202

Post by fpgaminer »

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #77

I was militant pro-mask when I was unvaccinated. Now that I'm vaccinated and have no comorbidities, I'm OK with being exposed to COVID-19. In fact, I want to have a mild case of COVID-19 to get natural immunity. Natural immunity seems to be more effective than the vaccine for long lasting immunity.

IIRC the CDC says there is evidence that vaccinated individuals can spread the delta variant. So it's important for everyone to continue to wear masks, even those vaccinated. It helps keep those who can't get vaccinated safe, and it helps reduce load on the hospitals so people can get timely treatment for other concerns. Additionally, breakthrough cases are a breeding ground for further evolution of the virus.

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#203

Post by 908B64B197 »

autokad wrote: post #196
908B64B197 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Cloth masks" can mean anything. I wish early in the pandemic someone would have made some piece of equipment to asses whether a given cloth mask is good or not. Most people have a few now and I'm sure they would like to use the best one.

we could have argued for all masks being sold to post some measurable stat about the mask, but then others would have argued that would have prevented masks from even hitting the shelf and we'd be worse off.

In the first weeks of the pandemic when there was a shortage of surgical masks? Any cloth was better than nothing. Several months into the pandemic? Would have liked to see a program to distribute "better" masks and retire the bad ones.

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#204

Post by nivenkos »

RHSeeger wrote: post #158
nivenkos wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's when I read comments like yours that I feel so jealous of the US. And then the same Americans ban you from Reddit if you complain about the lockdowns or forced mask mandates.

1. The people that are in charge of making such decisions (scientists, politicians, etc) said you should (and in some cases must) wear a mask. They said that doing so is more for the protections of others, but it also helps the wearer. 2. The impact of wearing a mask, with the exception of a small subset of people, is negligible. At most, it's very slightly uncomfortable. Given those two things, choosing _not_ to wea…

I don't want to get in to a philosophical argument, but here in Sweden pretty much no-one wears masks anywhere.

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#205

Post by input_sh »

kragen wrote: post #27
input_sh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then see this response to that claim by one of the study's authors: https://mobile.twitter.com/Jabaluck/status/14331294449405992...

Better link: https://birdsite.xanny.family/Jabaluck/status/14331294449405...

I wouldn't really call it better if it doesn't have a proper certificate.

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#206

Post by postalrat »

barbazoo wrote: post #100
djrogers wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Temporarily? In what was is any of this temporary if COVID is going to be endemic? At some point we need a way forward, and that really shouldn’t require masks in all public settings. BTW - masks completely destroy my beard, so they’re not ‘zero impact’ by any means. ;-)

I have a beard myself, how could I have forgotten about that. You're right, long term, improving ventilation is how to reduce exposure, in the meantime though, I don't think it's too much to ask to mask up.

It's been 2 years. How many more do I need to wait?

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#207

Post by Volundr »

proc0 wrote: post #199
Volundr wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can’t walk around with a mask indefinitely. I want to be clear I'm not advocating for this, but you can't? Why not? What's the time limit?

Why not lockdown forever, and everyone social distance and isolate? We CAN do that right?

> Why not lockdown forever, and everyone social distance and isolate? We CAN do that right?

Can we? I mean a lock down has economic consequences that I just don't see from mask use. Maybe technically it's possible, but one of these things is not like the other.

I'm not advocating for permanent mask use. I'm not even advocating particularly hard for mask use in general right now (I mean we probably should). I'm not advocating for mandates. But I keep seeing mask use being presented as some great hardship, that can only be born briefly (if at all) and I just don't see it.

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#208

Post by clairity »

YZF wrote: post #198
clairity wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, it's not "settled science" like that. the virus must traverse a gauntlet of death before reaching your juicy mucus membranes, including dessication and all manner of external forces that will inactivate it in the meantime. it falls apart in droves outside the body. you need constant exposure to warm, moist, infected exhaust so that the virus has trillions of chances of taking hold in your respiratory system, and…

I'm not talking about model studies. I am talking about case studies, like: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/health/airflow-coronaviru... Also: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/ferret-study-rein... Even early on with the Diamond Princess you've seen wide spread of the virus despite passengers being largely confined to their cabins. There were multiple other examples. We also know the Delta variant is more…

the diamond princess is especially poor evidence, as it was an after-the-fact investigation (with heavy motivation to find something and gain early notoriety), not a study per se. what likely happened was that there were multiple social infection vectors (not of the long-distance air variety but more the drunk chatting variety) and the crew and passengers distorted their testimony to limit their own liability exposure. the diamond princess case was also the source of the "virus lives for weeks outside the body" mistruth because pcr tests readily amplify partial, dead viral dna/rna just as well as live virus (it has to be 'killed' to be amplified, after all).

but yes, viral concentration is higher near an infected person, but it falls off rapidly (to something like the 3rd power iirc) with distance and time, especially the latter of which being why incidental exposure in public places is unlikely to be material. it's also something a small minority of people have at a given time (on average less than 1% of those around you). it's mainly socializing for extended periods of time where masks can potentially help reduce infection (that's when we're also most likely to let our guard down).

i'd go so far as to posit that sociability (via variables like social graph size/breadth) is likely more correlated to infection than (the lack of) mask usage.

Re: Surgical masks reduce Covid-19 spread, large-scale Stanford study shows

#209

Post by belorn »

mywittyname wrote: post #172
belorn wrote: post #124

Its interesting that the article do not mention a rather interesting finding in the study. For the age groups of Why aren't masks effective to reduce the spread for that age group? The discussion part of the study don't explore it. Is the distancing behavior of people aged 50 or higher different than those below? I would like to see further studies being done on the younger demographic in order to explain why the dat…

> Why aren't masks effective to reduce the spread for that age group? This is a good question and I think it is an important one since the title implies a different situation than what was actually tested. So the 11% reduction was due to an effort to increase mask wearing compliance by means of... > Providing free masks, informing people about the importance of covering both the mouth and nose, reminding people in-pe…

It not established in the study (that I can see in their findings) that people under 50 were wearing mask less than those above 50. The finding only showed that those under 50 did not benefit.

There could be any number of reason why the result of the data look like it is. If those villages are mostly small farming communities it might be that young people spend most of their time outside on the fields or herding animals while the older population spend more time inside. It might be that the older generations after a long hard working life need more active help from younger family members and can't do distancing (like in our elder care facilities). Mask has a rather good track record when people are working inside in close physical proximity to risk groups.

Since the study did not explore those question we can only speculate.

Post reply on HN