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

21–30 of 309 posts

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

#21

Post by ISL »

MiguelVieira wrote: post #10
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.

Right now it’s paradoxical: according to the government, masks are useless for civilians, but essential to medical personnel.

There is a resolution to the paradox. Masks do work (especially when worn correctly), but the net-optimal place to put them to work is keeping medical personnel up and functional.

Have spare masks? We are trying to get them to the people who need them most: https://findthemasks.com/

We are presently listing hospitals accepting small-scale donations in 28 states, growing fast.

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

#22

Post by [deleted] »

en-us wrote: post #12
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.

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…

[deleted]

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

#23

Post by CriticalCathed »

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.

It's not all that confusing. The science is pretty clear. The best use of masks on people in public is on the sick themselves. You can't use the standards and practices in something like a TB hospital for medical personnel in public spaces. Not only is it an inefficient use of resources, but the efficacy is in question.

You cannot expect the general population to adhere to the standards of a TB hospital. It cannot be done, even if it was a good idea. For example, standard practice is that a mask is meant to be worn for only 8 hours and that is under the assumption that you have no reason to believe you were exposed. If the mask becomes wet, damp, or if you have any reason to believe you've been exposed you're supposed to immediately doff it carefully and dispose of it. Typically PPE is used only once per exposure, or is reused for exposure to one patient at a time.

There are so many variables at play here. From the efficacy of the masks themselves, the best allocation of resources, the different varieties of masks, the techniques for proper fitting, the decontamination processes, other PPE. Does this mean masks are not useful? No. And you won't find many experts making this claim. It's clear that masks help.

Think critically about this. It is not as simple as "masks good" or "surgeon general lied." There are manifold hysterics going around -- please don't contribute to it.

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

#24

Post by EGreg »

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.

If the virus is mainly spread by coughing and sneezing, wouldn’t mandating absolutely everyone to wear a regular mask that covers their own cough be enough? Better than all these quarantine measures?

If you are caught without a mask you get fined.

How else can people get the virus? Perhaps people shed the virus through their skin? Or touch their face and get it on their hands? So people can wash their hands before touching their face. Also people can get it in their private homes. But those groups don’t mix all the time.

So I am just wondering... N95 masks are for the person who doesn’t want to get the virus. But what about everyone else?

I understand that you could wear the mask crooked and there are problems with application. But mass producing N95 masks and giving them out and MANDATING everyone wearing them like women in Saudi Arabia seems like a better policy.

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

#26

Post by CivBase »

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…

> 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.

It appeared to be very common for citizens to wear masks in eastern Asia long before this pandemic. I'm not the least bit surprised they were more prepared to scale up production.

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

#27

Post by Thriptic »

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.

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 correctly". The solution isn't stop doing code review, it's to teach people how to do it and to understand it's limitations.

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

#29

Post by bilbo0s »

sonicggg wrote: post #9
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.

Something does not add up about the advice. Specially given that Eastern authorities encourage the use of makes by the general public. Which part of the World is better handling this pandemic?

Masks should just be a given.

If we consider a place like South Korea, or Singapore, the executive actions contrast wildly with the executive actions that our city, state, and federal governments have taken.

If I'm not mistaken, in Singapore they even went so far as to distribute packs of masks to each and every family. I don't ask for that level of efficiency, but it does illustrate an example of effective executive action during times like these.

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

#30

Post by whatshisface »

ceejayoz wrote: post #19
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…

Washington state just seized a restock from a Target in Seattle. https://twitter.com/GovInslee/status/1241505423259099136

The message to commercial entities is clear: don't bother responding.
Post reply on HN