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

The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 310 posts

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#211

Post by Zancarius »

JPKab wrote: post #182
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #31

In all of these posts there is a strong 'what were they thinking' reaction. - remember hindsight. At the time, how were they supposed to know, by looking into their crystal ball? It was a fast, dynamically changing situation, everyone was getting sick, who a the time could say 'yeah, people are dying, but YOLO, no need to sanitize your hands.' Lot of freaking armchair quarterbacks in the 'lets criticize the medical c…

> "BEFORE VACCINES, BEFORE masks, before much at all was known about how the novel coronavirus spread and whether it lived on surfaces (remember wiping down grocery bags with Lysol?)" There is a strong "what were they thinking" behind this because we found out very early on that this virus didn't spread on surfaces, by spring 2020. But the public health apparatus found that keeping people as fearful as possible (even…

I know of people who still won't go to church because of all of the above and are, for all intents and purposes, still deathly afraid to leave their homes. Regardless of what some might say in argument against your point(s), I absolutely do think that part of the public health emergency was the abject panic that ensued following COVID.

I stopped exercising caution earlier on in the pandemic, because in my estimation my relatively good health, age, and literature that was available (D3 being an important predictor of outcomes) meant that I was unlikely to have a poor outcome. I did eventually get COVID in Dec 2021, but aside from a total loss of smell for 12 days and a dry cough it was little more than an annoyance. I isolated, as appropriate, for a week or so (never had a fever) and went about my business. Yet, nearly two months later, I remembered telling someone that I had had COVID, they recoiled and backed away as if I were still infectious. Fear is a strong emotion.

Part of it is that the general public doesn't understand viruses. We can't see them. That's a problem, because it's an unseen enemy with (at the time) unknown outcomes—especially with rapidly changing information. I don't think the media helped either, because they relish in bad news.

My mother was very nearly hospitalized last year, though. Not from COVID but from RSV. I suspect over-sanitization reduced our baseline immunity to your typical run-of-the-mill pathogens, but I'm neither a doctor nor a biologist so that's little more than a guess. I have some friends who are nurses who suggested the theory, and they may be right.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#212

Post by samstave »

wewtyflakes wrote: post #4
Mattasher wrote: post #2

This hand sanitizer everywhere thing was just one of the many unproductive insanities of the Covid era. Quick story: In 2021 I was shopping at an Office Max in Florida. At the counter, the checkout guy snuck two small bottles into my bag. Me: Wait! I didn't buy that! Him: Don't worry, it's free. Me: Ok, but what is it? Him: Hand sanitizer, we're giving them away. Me: (Takes bottles out of bag, hands back to him)

Can you elaborate on why you believe it was unproductive insanity?

I=Funny I literally just wrote about this problem

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=samstave&next=361522...

Basically - hand sanitzer fucks up your gut-biome and kills bacteria that is important for your immune system.

STOP USING THEM.

EAT DIRT - or you will be under dirt a lot faster.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#213

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

JPKab wrote: post #182
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #31

In all of these posts there is a strong 'what were they thinking' reaction. - remember hindsight. At the time, how were they supposed to know, by looking into their crystal ball? It was a fast, dynamically changing situation, everyone was getting sick, who a the time could say 'yeah, people are dying, but YOLO, no need to sanitize your hands.' Lot of freaking armchair quarterbacks in the 'lets criticize the medical c…

> "BEFORE VACCINES, BEFORE masks, before much at all was known about how the novel coronavirus spread and whether it lived on surfaces (remember wiping down grocery bags with Lysol?)" There is a strong "what were they thinking" behind this because we found out very early on that this virus didn't spread on surfaces, by spring 2020. But the public health apparatus found that keeping people as fearful as possible (even…

> There is a strong "what were they thinking" behind this because we found out very early on that this virus didn't spread on surfaces, by spring 2020.

Is this a true statement? If so, do you have any sources to back up your "spring 2020" claim? Heck, I didn't even think this was a true statement now, that is my understanding was that airborne transmission was the primary route, but transmission by fomites was still possible, e.g. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-r...

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#214

Post by hn976827 »

dahfizz wrote: post #174
hn976827 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had this pandemic turned out to kill 10% of the global population then it would definitely have been the right move. Turns out, that didn't happen. Because we were lucky regarding lethality, regarding contageousness, regardin speed of vaccine development. In hindsight, no biggy, how dare they made everybody sanitize their hands all the time. I worry about the real thing hitting someday. When the discussions start aga…

> In hindsight, no biggy, how dare they made everybody sanitize their hands all the time. I think you're really underplaying this. If the FDA hadn't suspended the rules about benzene, then fine. No biggy. But the government literally encouraged people to slather themselves with carcinogens on a hunch that it might help with COVID. I would even be fine with it if we had proof that hand sanitizer was the most effective…

When the real thing hits, a few carcinogens here and there will be ok if it saves civilization. The air in the average U.S. city is full of carcinogens, on top of volunteer smoking and drinking. Have you been as upset about that recently? Been out campaigning for more trains and less smoking?

And we won't have time for waiting for proof that it does or doesn't work. Of course in hindsight everybody is smart. But when the big one hits, there is no time for hindsight. By then we're all dead (or deep into a civil war).

Start with cautious. Adjust/relax rules when knowledge becomes available. Sanitizing your hands and wearing masks are the obvious immediate solution.

You make it sound like all companies suddenly poured toxic waste over the population, ordered by the government. Maybe it's not the government that was exaggerating here.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#215

Post by hn976827 »

revelio wrote: post #51
buildsjets wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What amazes me is that some people choose to continue 100% masking for various reasons, but wear ineffective or poor fitting cloth masks or generic flat surgical masks with huge gaps, when comfortable and effective N95s from name brands are readily and inexpensively available. Or they just chin-diaper.

Why is that amazing? Masking is a social phenomenon at this point. It's about showing other people what sort of person you are, not about the mask itself.

[flagged]

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#216

Post by VancouverMan »

JPKab wrote: post #182
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #31

In all of these posts there is a strong 'what were they thinking' reaction. - remember hindsight. At the time, how were they supposed to know, by looking into their crystal ball? It was a fast, dynamically changing situation, everyone was getting sick, who a the time could say 'yeah, people are dying, but YOLO, no need to sanitize your hands.' Lot of freaking armchair quarterbacks in the 'lets criticize the medical c…

> "BEFORE VACCINES, BEFORE masks, before much at all was known about how the novel coronavirus spread and whether it lived on surfaces (remember wiping down grocery bags with Lysol?)" There is a strong "what were they thinking" behind this because we found out very early on that this virus didn't spread on surfaces, by spring 2020. But the public health apparatus found that keeping people as fearful as possible (even…

The obvious fearmongering and irrationality, especially from so-called "experts", was quite intense and prolific in Canada, too.

Even as early as June of 2020, the public health authority in Canada's most-populous city (fourth highest population in North America) revealed that the counting of deaths was being done using a methodology that sounds quite dubious:

"Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19 are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto."

https://twitter.com/TOPublicHealth/status/127588839006028596...

By mid-2021, we started seeing news reports like the following:

"Patients died from neglect, not COVID-19, in Ontario LTC homes, military report finds: ‘All they needed was water and a wipe down’"

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-canadian-mili...

Stuff like that was just the tip of the iceberg.

Sadly, the widespread foolishness continued throughout Canada for most of 2022.

Even now, there are still remnants of it remaining in some cases, along with the irreparable long-term harm caused by the numerous unjustifiable policies put in place then.

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#217

Post by hn976827 »

lisasays wrote: post #84
pfannkuchen wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they mask then? It seems a little hard to psychologically disentangle what one does for social approval vs for other reasons. For example, maybe it feels emotionally uncomfortable to not mask. Is it because the subconscious is worried about disease, or because the subconscious is worried about social approval? Probably some of both, but if we removed one perhaps the external behavior would change, hard to tell…

I think you're overthinking this, especially as to hidden psychological motivations. The primary reason some people still mask is very simple: For anyone who follows basic science, not what the crowd is doing -- N95 masks in enclosed / crowded situations are still a good idea, especially for those of a certain age. Many people continue to wear useless (or only marginally) useful masks, and in non-crowded situations (…

[flagged]

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#218

Post by hn976827 »

NoZebra120vClip wrote: post #115
lisasays wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're overthinking this, especially as to hidden psychological motivations. The primary reason some people still mask is very simple: For anyone who follows basic science, not what the crowd is doing -- N95 masks in enclosed / crowded situations are still a good idea, especially for those of a certain age. Many people continue to wear useless (or only marginally) useful masks, and in non-crowded situations (…

"The basic science" says that masking protects other people if I am infected with a comparatively high viral load and I am prone to sneezing or coughing unprotected. The basic science tells me to stay home when that happens because I am not fit for public appearances. Normal people stay home when they're sick, they don't infect others, and the basic science takes care of that just fine. If crazy people want to follow…

[flagged]

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#219

Post by GeekyBear »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #31

In all of these posts there is a strong 'what were they thinking' reaction. - remember hindsight. At the time, how were they supposed to know, by looking into their crystal ball? It was a fast, dynamically changing situation, everyone was getting sick, who a the time could say 'yeah, people are dying, but YOLO, no need to sanitize your hands.' Lot of freaking armchair quarterbacks in the 'lets criticize the medical c…

> At the time, how were they supposed to know, by looking into their crystal ball?

You pay attention to the news reports showing that despite locking down the passengers of the Pacific Princess cruise ship in their cabins, the disease continued to spread from cabin to cabin?

What other theory than airborne spread fits that data?

Re: The explosive legacy of the hand sanitizer boom

#220

Post by pfannkuchen »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #123
pfannkuchen wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they mask then? It seems a little hard to psychologically disentangle what one does for social approval vs for other reasons. For example, maybe it feels emotionally uncomfortable to not mask. Is it because the subconscious is worried about disease, or because the subconscious is worried about social approval? Probably some of both, but if we removed one perhaps the external behavior would change, hard to tell…

Given that the unmasked vastly outnumber the masked it's not for social approval. I still mask (N95) in places because I haven't been sick since 2019 and it makes me happy. There's very few people left who mask. The social pressure is very much to take off the mask.

Yeah, simply “social approval” isn’t the right way to put it. What I mean is more nuanced - a feeling of “doing the right thing” and demonstrating that one is “doing the right thing”, as conditioned by one’s own social circle.
Post reply on HN