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

171–180 of 309 posts

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

#171

Post by greeneggs »

reddog wrote: post #105
jliptzin wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea this is really frustrating. I bought a box of 10 N-95s in January when I saw what was going on in China and figured they’d be good to have, since I have older people in my family who are in poor health (leukemia, diabetes, heart disease). Now since I’m shopping and cooking for them, I am trying really hard not to get sick so I wear a mask to the stores and I’m getting looks from people like I stole them from a ho…

>How about we blame the government for not ramping up production of masks back in January or not having a strategic reserve of masks, gloves and suits in a giant warehouse somewhere. You could rotate the stock though the marketplace during safe times so it would cost little. Probably less than the CDCs $110 million dollar visitors center. What kind of pandemic was the government preparing for? One that did not need n…

The US government does have such a stockpile.

> The Department of Health and Human Services said last week that the stockpile has about 12 million N95 respirators and 30 million surgical masks —a scant 1 percent of the estimated 3.5 billion masks the nation would need in a severe pandemic. Another 5 million N95 masks in the stockpile are expired.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/face-masks-in-...

The article goes into a lot more detail, including what the stockpile includes, funding, and information about state stockpiles.

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

#172

Post by davrosthedalek »

deelowe wrote: post #40
Thriptic wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very irritating because people don't understand the concept of defense in depth. Are surgical masks going to give you total protection? Of course not, but as you say they provide SOME benefit. Saying "masks don't work because they don't fully stop the virus and users misuse them" is basically equivalent to saying "code review is a waste of time because it won't catch every bug and because devs don't do it correc…

What's more frustrating is the exact same logic applies to "social distancing." Social distancing will not completely stop people from getting sick. It'll just slow the spread. So, according to the CDC, an imperfect solution for quarantine is totally fine, but when it comes to masks, only n95 or better are worth pursuing.

That's not necessary so. While "not doing social distancing right" will not increase your risk compared to not trying, with masks it's not so clear cut: You have to touch your face to put them on and take them off, and people might touch their face more often to adjust them etc. That increases the risk, at least if you wear them to protect yourself. And people might take greater risks because they feel safe. If this is not counterbalanced by the risk reduction through wearing a mask, it's a problem. Additionally, if there is a mask shortage, it might increase the risk indirectly, even for those who don't want to spread it.

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

#173

Post by ardy42 »

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.

>> 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.

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

The point of an improvised mask should not be to protect the wearer, but to protect the community from the wearer.

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

#174

Post by acqq »

MiroF wrote: post #90
Jare wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- If you tell the public that masks are great protection, and the public can't find then to buy, that is a huge source of unrest. - The messaging (in Spain but looks similar everywhere) has been that you should wear one if you are sick or, more importantly here, if you are at risk. This is a clear indication that they do help protect against being infected. This should have prevented everyone from harassing anyone we…

> I personally hate being told something that is patently false, but I totally understand that, collectively, we need to be lied to for our own protection, because collectively we become a bunch of idiots. Yep, I understand this. I've also noticed recent emphasis on the danger of the virus to young people (like this somewhat misleading NYT article [1], although I just noticed that they recently updated it), I suspect…

Young people aren't automatically immune:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11226440/three-junior-doctors-...

No sane medical person would connect three 30-years doctors to the breathing machines ("ventilators") unless they actually had to be connected to them:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/ventilators-...

And the "invasive" ones (see the picture) are the last chance for people to survive, but it's best not to come that far:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-8131947/Eng...

That's why it's in the interest of everybody for the hospitals to remain functional and that the current speed of growth gets at least significantly reduced.

That's why "the curve" has to be "spread."

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

#175

Post by takeda »

susanhi wrote: post #137
Jare wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- If you tell the public that masks are great protection, and the public can't find then to buy, that is a huge source of unrest. - The messaging (in Spain but looks similar everywhere) has been that you should wear one if you are sick or, more importantly here, if you are at risk. This is a clear indication that they do help protect against being infected. This should have prevented everyone from harassing anyone we…

“You should wear one if you are sick” Asymptomatic carriers are showing as a large contributor of spread. We should have a mandate for masks for everyone (since we don’t know who is a carrier or not) and government should contract manufacturers to ramp production ASAP to meet the demand. China and South Korea has ramped productions and is allocating 2 masks per week per resident. US has 330 million people. 2 per pers…

There was an act passed (I don't remeber its name, but it was meant for situations like this) that allows government to force factories to produce needed materials. Yet government refused to use it, they refuse to invoke stay in place in remaining states. They blocked states from doing testing, bidding against states for supplies and cherry on top DOJ secretly asked if they can suspend constitutional rights to allow holding people in cells for unspecified time among other things. WTF, it's like they want this pandemic to be as bad as possible.

We already can see most countries working and flattening the infection curve, yet US is still growing exponentially. We are now #3 and looks like we will be #1 (surpassing China and Italy) before March ends.

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

#176

Post by throwaway32120 »

jayd16 wrote: post #161
throwaway32120 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the problems with the hyperpartisanship in America is that it prevents people from acknowledging leadership problems that both parties share. Though I think that Trump has done an incredibly poor job of handling this crisis, there's little evidence that other leaders - in Congress, at the state level, in the media, etc. - have done any better. Of course all our leaders will want to blame other people right now…

This is a failure of the executive branch. Congress did its job long ago. The executive branch already had the legal means it needed but the administration chose to abdicate its responsibility.

Do you have evidence that other politicians would have handled things significantly differently? As I said, the articles I found from the beginning of the crisis don't demonstrate that. Have you found any articles from, say, the beginning of February where politicians are calling for a much more robust response? The legislative branch certainly has the ability to act when they don't think the executive branch is up to the task (they actually were embroiled with a political battle with Trump at the start of this, but it was about impeachment).

Getting rid of Trump and replacing him with someone who would have handled this much better is great. Replacing Trump with someone who would have handled things about as well, keeping all the other political leaders who dropped the ball on this, and not changing the deep structural issues that have made things worse, will do little to help.

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

#177

Post by takeda »

MiroF wrote: post #90
Jare wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- If you tell the public that masks are great protection, and the public can't find then to buy, that is a huge source of unrest. - The messaging (in Spain but looks similar everywhere) has been that you should wear one if you are sick or, more importantly here, if you are at risk. This is a clear indication that they do help protect against being infected. This should have prevented everyone from harassing anyone we…

> I personally hate being told something that is patently false, but I totally understand that, collectively, we need to be lied to for our own protection, because collectively we become a bunch of idiots. Yep, I understand this. I've also noticed recent emphasis on the danger of the virus to young people (like this somewhat misleading NYT article [1], although I just noticed that they recently updated it), I suspect…

Today a person aged 27 died in Poland from coronavirus.

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

#178

Post by wutbrodo »

Jare wrote: post #69
erentz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

- If you tell the public that masks are great protection, and the public can't find then to buy, that is a huge source of unrest. - The messaging (in Spain but looks similar everywhere) has been that you should wear one if you are sick or, more importantly here, if you are at risk. This is a clear indication that they do help protect against being infected. This should have prevented everyone from harassing anyone we…

> I totally understand that, collectively, we need to be lied to for our own protection, because collectively we become a bunch of idiots.

This is a tall order in the modern informational environment. There are enough honest people out there that the truth will filter out, first to people who think critically and then as a meme to be swallowed uncritically by the masses. Then you just end up further damaging the credibility of official sources at a time when their credibility is important.

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

#179

Post by austinnoone »

asiachick wrote: post #167

I'm still trying to understand why Japan's numbers are so low. You can argue they aren't testing but if the infection rate is similar then the death rate should be similar was well regardless of testing or not. They aren't staying home. Restaurants, bars, and events are still open. Trains are still packed at rush hour. Festivals are still happening. They're planning on starting school in April. I can only see a few p…

Could it be iodine in their diet from seaweed?

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

#180

Post by skipwalker »

Symmetry wrote: post #108
skipwalker wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found a few links on making "ninja" masks out of t-shirts. They seem as good as any. The best thing is you can just throw them in the washing machine after an outing. https://www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Ninja-Mask http://www.funlol.com/1255/Ninja_Instructions!.html “Origami” tea cloth mask with rubber bands https://www.instagram.com/p/B96rcR8neYv/

There was a paper that went by my Twitter feed yesterday about how dish towels tended to do better on the particulates the researchers were testing on than a t-shirt (or piece of silk, or double layer cotton shirt, or...). I agree about them being better than nothing and it'll be fairly dependent on aerosol size but you should probably prefer thicker clothes.

This website chose cotton t-shirts as the best combo

https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/diy-homemade-mask-protec...

https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/best-materials-make-diy-...

Post reply on HN