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

How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 309 posts

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#121

Post by susanhi »

tyingq wrote: post #5

The mask guidance is confusing as well. I get they are trying to preserve masks for medical staff. But, they also say it's mainly spread by coughing, sneezing, and resulting spray of bodily fluids. Surely even a scarf around your face would have some benefit? Yes, I get that the virus is small enough to pass through, but some deflection is better than none.

China has ramped their face mask production to 200 million a DAY. And

CDC’s continued insistence that face masks don’t work is disingenuous at best. Leading way to a global recession at worst.

Had they changed their guidelines to saying that face masks can help inhibit spread at the very least, especially from asymptomatic carriers who are wearing masks, US gov could have contracted mask manufacturers to with millions of dollars worth of mask orders. Spurring then to produce masks, eliminating this shortage of masks.

Instead, gov plan has no mask protocol, so the only other option is a global shutdown of “non-essential businesses”. Causing an essential shutdown of the economy. The cost of which they have obviously not calculated.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#122

Post by dempseye »

jtms wrote: post #98

I have a box of n95 masks I bought a few years back while living in Singapore (there is an annual smoke “haze” there from neighboring countries burning forest to clear land for palm oil production). I tried to give them to a nurse to distribute to other medical staff, but they couldn’t use them because they are a year or so beyond the expiration. News to me that masks even have an expiration date.

Ask them again in a week.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#123

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

simonh wrote: post #91
en-us wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The US surgeon general lied to the population about the efficacy of masks to try to preserve them for healthcare workers. It would have been better to ask people to preserve N95 for healthcare workers and instead improvise their own. Any reduction in droplet transmission is going to drop the R0 of this and help flatten the curve. As an alternative see Hong Kong, where they are encouraging the population to im…

Improvised masks commonly provide little protection, but obstruct breathing so people suck in more air with more force, increasing their risk of exposure.

Unless you have a study that backs this up, this is just baseless speculation. I agree with the other posters, I am incredibly frustrated with the CDC for misleading about the efficacy of surgical masks with statements like "the virus particles are smaller than the holes in the mask" - that may be true, but all the studies I could find show that masks reduce flu transmission by 70-80%.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#124

Post by DoreenMichele »

From what I gather, the CDC is also largely sweeping the Hepatitis issue under the rug (which is something of a quiet epidemic, but certainly nothing on the scale of covid19).

It disproportionately impacts the homeless. The problem appears to have started in San Diego and spread outward from there.

I'm aware of the issue because a reporter from San Diego contacted me and interviewed me via email in September 2017 because I run the San Diego Homeless Survival Guide.* Another reporter contacted me when it reached Los Angeles.

I received an email last September from something I'm subscribed to indicating it had reached Washington state, though my county was not listed.

On a per capita basis, the small town I live in has a worse homeless problem than the big cities that routinely make the news for it. If I had any real power, I would be trying to come up with the means to do a free hygiene event for the homeless and give away hand sanitizer and free haircuts and Hepatitis vaccines, something I had on my mind before covid19 became a thing.

I've seen relatively little in the press about it. I have seen at least one article about the resurgence of "Medieval diseases."

To my mind, our homeless policies are actively creating a health hazard for the entire nation. CDC policy looks to me like part of the problem. They seem to be sitting on the data about the spread of hepatitis and intentionally not making an effort to publicize it.

I imagine it will get swept under the rug entirely in the face of covid19. This seems to me like a good means to compound our problems.

I have no idea what do about it.

* https://sandiegohomelesssurvivalguide.blogspot.com/2017/09/f...

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#125

Post by the8472 »

MiroF wrote: post #111
nprz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that wasn't the actual message coming from the Surgeon General. The original message appears to intentionally obscure the fact that not only does the US not have enough masks for our civilians, we also don't have enough masks for our health care professionals.

In emergency situations, it's possible misleading the public might be somewhat necessary to reach optimal health outcomes. There is substantial literature on this question with regards to climate change messaging. The government already misleads the public when it exaggerates things like the actual threat of terrorism to the average American, at least this time it is lying with some sort of societal good in mind.

Perhaps, but it also pours gasoline on the flame of skepticism, once the cat is out of the bag and there's proof that they have lied. I.e. those decisions don't exist in a vacuum, they require (and burn) trust built in the past and decrease trust in the future. At some point it ceases to work and only makes things worse.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#126

Post by susanhi »

erentz wrote: post #16
tyingq wrote: post #5

The mask guidance is confusing as well. I get they are trying to preserve masks for medical staff. But, they also say it's mainly spread by coughing, sneezing, and resulting spray of bodily fluids. Surely even a scarf around your face would have some benefit? Yes, I get that the virus is small enough to pass through, but some deflection is better than none.

The whole blaming people for hoarding masks and then the "masks don't work" things have been incredibly frustrating. It is almost like authorities didn't want anyone to start asking why the public couldn't get masks, as they can in say Taiwan. Most (if not all) distributors and manufacturers of masks has been prioritizing health care systems and governments over retailers since January. Just as they should do. Were t…

The government should have contracted mask manufacturers 2 months ago to ramp their mask production, both for medical staff and for the public.

They still haven’t done this to date. Beyond frustrating.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#127

Post by ISL »

ceejayoz wrote: post #88
bdavis__ wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they were purchased. the government does not just take property. in the end it may be the GSA price, which may not be the same as target was expecting to retail it at.

> the government does not just take property lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_forfeiture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U...

Or, closer to the issue at hand:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain

I don't have time to look right now, but I suspect most states (and the feds) have the ability to repurpose private assets in emergencies, with some constraints.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#128

Post by catalogia »

ceejayoz wrote: post #114
catalogia wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The action sends a message to the producers of masks too; that they shouldn't bother trying to meet the public's demand for masks by massively scaling up production because the government won't allow those sales. By suppressing perceived demand for masks, the economics of scaling up production become less appealing to manufacturers.

The government can, and should, guarantee they'll purchase as many as you can make right now. They could, in fact, order that production. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950 Trump's been hemming and hawing on invoking it for several days now. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/medical-orgs-urge-trump-t... > Health care professionals from the American Hospital Association (AHA), the American M…

That's not all the government is doing though. They are saying things that will convince people in the future, once this pandemic and supply problems are resolved, that they shouldn't bother buying masks to prepare for the next time. They're suppressing demand for masks not only in the present but in the future as well. In doing so, they make mask manufacturers less inclined to scale up production now or ever, since scaling up production now would become a liability for them in the near-future when the medical industry returns to buying the normal number of masks again. Increased long-term public demand for masks would support the long-term increased production of masks and would therefore make mask manufacturers more inclined to make long-term investments in their manufacturing capacity.

Furthermore, increasing long-term public demand for masks would reduce the severity of future respiratory pandemics, since a larger portion of the population would be prepared in the future.

Edit:

> "There are two issues you're mixing together. The government should stop lying [...]"

That's on-message for this entire discussion as far as I'm concerned. The topic for discussion is the CDC's lies. Discussing the distribution of masks without discussing authorities suppressing the demand for masks is myopic. These two issues are not distinct.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#129

Post by namelosw »

tyingq wrote: post #5

The mask guidance is confusing as well. I get they are trying to preserve masks for medical staff. But, they also say it's mainly spread by coughing, sneezing, and resulting spray of bodily fluids. Surely even a scarf around your face would have some benefit? Yes, I get that the virus is small enough to pass through, but some deflection is better than none.

I was wondering the same. I'm by no means professional but it seems to be better than nothing, especially for people who sneeze.

In China, it's pretty much contained now, and everyone wears masks on the street -- The thing is, there are 1.3 billion people, of course there are a lot of people couldn't buy or afford surgical masks, let alone N95 masks.

It turns out people wear regular masks, or even they don't have any mask they sew their own mask.

Also, most surgical and N95 masks are disposable, in China, people cover their hand sewed mask outside, covering the disposable masks inside and try to reuse them, and disposes the hand-sews masks. This hack, of course, have potential risks, but it might help for people who are running out of masks.

Re: How the CDC’s restrictive testing guidelines hid the coronavirus epidemic

#130

Post by [deleted] »

ceejayoz wrote: post #55
ellius wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there are two "mental tools" I wish we could teach every person, they are exponential growth and statistical thinking. Neither is intuitive, but they would help people understand this whole situation (and many others) a lot better.

My high school math teacher introduced exponential growth by asking the class if we'd take $1M now or $0.01 doubled daily for a month. We, as most people do, wanted the $1M, but the penny turns into more than $5M. Had to explain this to someone yesterday. They literally wouldn't believe me until I screenshotted an Excel spreadsheet of the daily doublings, despite a finance degree.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN