Hacker News Reader

Comment by bouncycastle | Hacker News Reader

I think what Japan really needs to do is to run a campaign to change the culture. One of the problems is that they put too much confidence in face masks. What they need to do is run a message that if you show any symptoms then stay home and avoid contact altogether.

Most of these masks are just toys and not air tight at all. One experiment you can do with the mask is go outside in cold weather, so that you can see the steam when you breathe. You will notice that when you breathe, most of air is actually escaping through the edges of the mask and around the nose.

Also, there is a culture of not staying home when you're sick. It's normal to continue going to work with a cold / other infection, or school or shop. Sick leave is frowned upon. Just put on a mask and you're all sweet, right? That has to change.

View on HN

Masks in Japan are based on the desire of Japaneses not to infect others and not to spread their own germs. They won't filter the air coming in or out, but they'll catch a sneeze and a cough. They also make it so you don't put your fingers in your mouth or nose. It's the sick that wear them. You barely see them elsewhere because the idea of "wear something uncomfortable for the sake of others" is a hard sell in the west.

If you are sick enough to wear a mask in public, you should probably just stay home.

"According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the average number of paid sick days often corresponds directly with years of service. Here are the averages for workers in private industry: Workers receive 7 sick days per year with 1 to 5 years of service. Workers receive 8 sick days per year with 5 to 10 years of service."

"For colds, most individuals become contagious about a day before cold symptoms develop and remain contagious for about five to seven days." / "If you have the flu, you'll be contagious one day before developing symptoms and up to five to seven days after becoming ill."

One cold would take up all your sick days. By following your recommendation, someone falling sick more than once a year would have to quit their job.

Doesn't sound nice true.

How do you transmit the flu to others without symptoms like sneezing/running nose?

There exists a metric ton of other possible vectors for viruses to spread. It depends on the virus though.

We don't yet conclusively know what vectors this virus can use to spread.

I read on on alot, thank you.

The concept of "paid sick days" baffles me. It implies that when the doctor says you're too sick to work and hands you a certificate, you won't get paid by default or that it should even be legal to not pay you. No wonder Americans are so reluctant to see the doctor, if both the doctor is expensive and also they won't get paid if they're sick.

In most EU countries you are not allowed to work and your employer will get into trouble if he lets you work when you've got a sick cert. Your employer obviously also has to pay you and is not allowed to fire you for getting sick[1].

If this outbreak causes the US to update its workers protections for the 21st century, at least something good will come out of it.

[1]: in some countries you can receive a reduction in pay after being sick for X months in a row, usually to ~60%.

The service industry such as fast food has virtually no "paid sick days", and conveniently are jobs with lots of people interaction, poor pay, and poor if any health insurance.

So you "might" have the cold or coronavirus - do you go to the ER (costs hundreds even with insurance) and lose out on your pay? (Not to mention you'll likely have your hours cut as "punishment"). Or do you tough it out and keep making money that you need to pay for your rent?

Once worked for a Wall Street firm that had a "no sick days" policy. I came in every single day, sick as a dog or not, and as far as I can recall, everyone else did, too.

It's not just the poor--some of this really just is our (crazy) culture.

If that's the case, make sure you make the coffee / drinks / etc for as many decision makers as possible so they get the gunk from the glass.

As someone who has worked in the service industry as a server, manager, and eventually part-owner, why should we burden the business owner with the responsibility to pay when someone is sick and unable to work? This is compounded by the fact that service industry often requires physical presence, which translates to the business having to pay both the sick worker and the worker's temporary replacement.

Doesn't this fall to the government to create some kind of aid? At the very least, the gov could offer a tax break for wages paid sick workers.

> why should we burden the business owner with the responsibility to pay when someone is sick and unable to work?

Is it really such burden to the business owner to see to the well-being of their employees?

> At the very least, the gov could offer a tax break for wages paid sick workers.

I like this idea, tbqh.

Wages paid are deductible business expenses already.

> Wages paid are deductible business expenses already.

Up to how much? I can't imagine wages paid are 100% deductible. Otherwise nothing's stopping people from starting businesses and paying wages to friends to reduce tax burdens...

Up to any amount, provided they are: Ordinary and necessary, Reasonable in amount, Paid for services actually provided, Paid for or incurred in the tax year. And the "any amount" has a limit beyond which you are found to not be operating a profit-seeking business.

(Those are the fairly standard tests for all business deductions, only the third is at all specific to wages.)

There's no way to "make money" by incurring additional expenses and deducting them. If you have $100 in deductible business expenses and your marginal rate is 35%, you are paying $100 in expenses and getting back $35 on your taxes, so you're still out of pocket $65.

"There's [usually] no way"

It’s 100% deductible just like most other businesses expenses given you only pay taxes on net profits, if it weren’t tax deductible you would end up with a higher tax burden than what your business makes and therefore can pay.

Paying family/friends wages counts as a business expense to the company and taxable revenue to the employee. The business can also incur additional overheads for having employees like payroll taxes, super, etc.

Not trying to argue the other side, but there are people who claim to be sick when they just want to be paid to not work. So an ideal system should also deal with that possibility.

There is a limit around where I live here in Eastern Europe. 15 days per year but there are exceptions such as pregnancy and whatnot. Plus they abolished a particular law so now the employer can fire you while you are on sick pay.

The business as an organization has a responsibility to value the humanity of the laborers they employ, which includes understanding that the greater benefit of paying wages is that now everyone has more money to spend on the business (assuming the business is actually good). Similarly, the business should be investing in making sure people are not coming into work sick, especially in the service industry! Spreading sickness to ones customers is a horrific idea. And lastly but not leastly, being able to treat people as humans actually saves the business money in turnover/training costs!

That's what insurance is for.

There is nothing unique about American businesses that means they cannot pay sick pay. In the UK there is mandatory minimum amount that must be paid an employee is off sick for more than 4 days. So how many low paying jobs the statutory minimum is what they will get but many employers will offer your full-time wages for a certain amount for example the first 15 days or 10 days of sick per year. However if you are long term sick then you will eventually end up on statutory sick pay. But even that is better than nothing. And you should remember the many American companies that operate in the UK also offer this to their employees. Of course perhaps that is offset somewhat by not having them pay healthcare insurance for their employees (although there is National Insurance to pay for the NHS)

> As someone who has worked in the service industry as a server, manager, and eventually part-owner, why should we burden the business owner with the responsibility to pay when someone is sick and unable to work?

Because pooling risk results in more robust social systems.

The business owner can take the risk of losing a worker for a week much better than a worker can take the risk of not getting paid.

Because it aligns incentives properly.

If you don't get paid for not working while sick, and you need the money, you'll show up to work, and get other employees and customers sick. If the business has to pick up the tab for sick days, though, they are now incentivised to keep sick workers at home - lest they infect others.

I'd much rather have robust systems, with good public health incentives, then I am to see business owners pocket a few percentage points of profits.

I think their point was it should be paid from a public fund instead of by the individual business, although I suppose most businesses must have sick pay insurance to pay this, do they not?

You have not addressed why this is not a burden that should be shouldered by government versus business owners.

> I'd much rather have robust systems, with good public health incentives, then I am to see business owners pocket a few percentage points of profits.

For many small business owners, it can be the difference between paying yourself that week or not.

Although there are a number of socially related reasons - there are likely some significant immediate commercial reasons to do so.

If you're in a service related industry - do you want staff coming to work if they are (or recently) suffering from digestive illnesses? How would an outbreak of people getting sick after being at your facility look? It could potentially result in very very bad publicity - to the point of destroying your business.

If you're running a smaller business / facility - do you want an employee coming in and spreading the illness to your other workers in the early stages of being sick (and then later taking time off)? This could result in your business lacking sufficient staff to open if you can't use labor hire staff.

The reason why it might be good for businesses to provide an incentive (like sick pay) not to work when sick is that it reduces the risk of negative outcomes to the business.

In this thread about Japan, why are you ranting about the US? I think most people (at least Americans) have heard this before, and it would be more relevant and informative to describe the situation in Japan rather than the US or EU.

It's really fun to think about how Covid-19 will do in a country where the average worker has too few sick days, and where the cultural norm is to "just bear it" and continue working/attending school/being in public even when sick.

* applies to the US. And less developed nations.

This is sad, but luckily, a lot of people in our industry can just work from home on sick days (even though, normally, working remote for them wouldn't be an option). On my team specifically (as well as my old team), you would be pretty much turned away and asked to stay home if you were sick, which is something I have come to heavily appreciate.

> sick enough to wear a mask in public

As I understand it, the bar is really low on that. If you're coughing or sneezing, you should wear a mask. It doesn't matter if you otherwise feel fine. I don't think it's necessary to stay at home simply because you're sneezing, and I doubt it's a valid excuse to skip work or school.

> They won't filter the air coming in or out, but they'll catch a sneeze and a cough.

How can both parts of this statement be true?

Coughs and sneezes are mucous suspended in the air. The face masks don’t stop “true” airborn infections, just ones where the infection vector is mucous.

It'll catch most of the large droplets.

Most of the large droplets fall to the ground instantly without a mask anyways, though.

It's the aerosolized smaller droplets that travel far and end up infecting others in your vicinity.

When you sneeze or cough any mucus or other fluids are projected forward and into the inside of the mask. When you exhale, the air pressure in the mask increases and air is forced out the sides.

No, these masks are not bio-safety level 4, but they're probably better than nothing. At worst they prevent a portion of your sneeze and cough ejecta from landing on surfaces around you.

Visited Tokyo last week. At least 95% of the people were wearing masks. Probably closer to 99%.

Way over exaggerating.

Was in Tokyo last week and this week.

Depending on the day my guess was that 40-70% of people were wearing masks - more on public transit.

I assume that you mostly were at the Airport or public transit/other huge venues - otherwise I cannot really explain our different experiences.

Makes sense. That highlights the difference between individualistic and collectivist cultures. But if the measurable, scientific benefit of wearing a poorly-fitted mask is minimal at best, masks are pandemic security theater anyways. And I'm unsure if collectivist cultures consider that. Why bother doing something for the group, if the thing has no actual benefit other than appeasement.

A minimal increase across an entire population becomes relevant.

You're forgetting that it's a season for the pollens and so many people have allergies against that, many people start wearing masks at this season. But the Corona has pretty much wiped masks off the shelves and those who need are having a hard time getting one.

And of course, much like the drug supply chains, I'm going to assume that masks are largely manufactured in (wait for it) China and factory lines are probably shut down.

Even if they weren't, the whole Just In Time(tm) inventory system will hammer you.

Nobody is going to staff up to make more masks because everyone knows that you will make lots of money for a couple months and then the demand will crash afterwards when Coronavirus has passed.

Yet I see people grab their mask and pull it down to let a huge sneeze or cough out into the open, unprotected, all the time. I’ve even had convenience store workers pull down their mask to cough into their hands right before handing me something. Not to mention guys (not sure about women) pretty much never wash their hands with soap and water after using the toilet. Most train station bathrooms, excluding the Shinkansen stations, don’t even have soap—and I’ve been to plenty of doctor’s offices and restaurants that have no soap in or near their bathrooms.

Basic understand of disease spread and hygiene is lacking here. Changing into slippers when entering a building and wearing decorative masks are all about appearances, and that’s what’s most important in Japan. It’s even more evident with that sham of a quarantine on the cruise ship before letting infected people off.

I don’t think what you’re describing is specific to Japan.

I regularly see all of the unhygienic behaviors you have described in public in Europe and in the US as well.

Other countries have problems, but they’re not praised for their perceived cleanliness. I’ve also never had trouble finding soap in any other bathrooms, and no soap in the bathrooms of some medical clinics indicates a much deeper problem.

Idk about Europe, but in my 10+ years in the US, I haven't seen a single bathroom (whether public or in someone's home) that didn't have soap. And that's across both coasts and a bunch of different states.

Check out a cash only gas station the next time you need to fill up and ask to use the restroom.

It's often cleaner than one in the cool, hip, vegan-only, fifty-craft-micro-beers-on-tap establishment I occasionally eat at.

In what country? I can't remember the last time I saw such a thing, so I think it's at least been multiple decades. If I did, I would, you know, probably not even attempt to use the restroom.

Arco and Valero in California are two chains that are effectively cash only (they take debit cards but charge a fee that's high when pricing it into the cost off gas). I no longer live in the US, but still visit family every year and I've seen those on every visit.

Oh. But those are big chains, so I probably would expect the bathroom to be decent.

I think these places are franchises so cleanliness and maintenance depends on the owner.

Is there some rationale for the lack of washing with soap? And is this just after men use the urinals, or also after they use the stalls?

Stalls and urinals. At most, I see guys wet the tips of their nails with water, usually followed by fixing up their hair quick.

I wonder if one is supposed to carry one's own soap/hand sanitizer, as it goes with tissue paper (many Japanese bathrooms will not supply it).

And most bathrooms don't have towels to dry your hands. You're expected to bring your own towel, leave with wet hands, or use the electric blow-dryer and scatter germs all over the bathroom. For a country as obsessed with bathroom hygiene as Japan is, the lack of hand towels seems bizarre to me.

I’ve lived in America and Japan and have traveled the world. There’s absolutely no question that Japanese people have a much, much higher awareness of personal hygiene than most people elsewhere. Whatever axe you’re grinding here, the premise that Japanese people in particular are just robotically going through the motions is utterly inconsistent with my personal experience. During this Covid-19 episode, every single person who visits my home goes directly to the sink to wash their hands, unprompted. Masks are a precaution, not a cure. If nothing else, they’re a reminder that we’re in a heightened state of vigilance. If anyone were to sneeze or cough in public in Kyoto right now, you better believe that everyone is going to notice. It’s tourists that are visibly breaking the rules of hygiene as far as I’ve seen. (Your example of a conbini worker is funny since they’re generally foreigners.) The first signal that this outbreak was serious was when I noticed all the Apple Store employees were masked up. They’re the front line of dealing with foreign visitors.

People also rarely touch each other. No hugging, no kissing, no handshaking. All of this is important at times like this. Riding the subways here and in Tokyo recently, I notice that no one is holding a strap or pole any more.

Funny that you mention foreigners, because trying to get an STD test in this country is hell. Doctors will grill you and ask if you’ve had sex with foreigners, and if not, why worry? There’s no way you have an STD. Unless you’re leaking blood, doctors will argue that you don’t really need an STD test. They say that to me even though I’m clearly foreign, but I guess I’m not one of those foreigners.

I had to visit a few clinics until I finally managed to get one to give me a test. Even then, I had to argue with them to do more than test only chlamydia and at least include gonorrhea. Syphilis and HIV weren’t included with any degree of persuasion, since they said only certain foreigners from certain countries have it, so there’s no chance of having that. That’s in the midst of a syphilis outbreak in a country that offers unprotected services with prostitutes. It seems like a pattern of fundamental misunderstanding among doctors.

I also once had pinkeye and went to an ophthalmologist. The doctor was calling people in one by one during allergy season and examining people in an open office setting so it was possible to see them be person before you being examined. The doctor wore no gloves. The doctor didn’t wash his hands before seeing me. After touching my eyes, he said he’d get me some eye drops, told me I was good to go, and immediately called the next person over.

I’ve also frequently been prescribed kanpou/traditional Chinese medicine and had to go to another clinic to get real medicine.

These are my experiences with medical understanding here. There’s a big problem with blaming “foreigners”, but the only people I’ve seen washing their hands with soap have been... foreign tourists.

The syphilis thing is true. I've watched a few NHK health programs teaching Japanese people what syphilis looks like because most don't know how to ID it.

Also, I have had doctors just look at me, feel my throat and look into my eyes then give me the all clear at a physical. Like, how do you know I'm even okay just taking a glance?

Kanpou is something I have tried with limited success. I think it works on a placebo effect rather than actually curing you.

> Also, I have had doctors just look at me, feel my throat and look into my eyes then give me the all clear at a physical. Like, how do you know I'm even okay just taking a glance?

From my experiences in a bit less than a dozen countries in the US, Europe and East Asia, that unfortunately seems to be a worldwide standard. Unless you're showing very obvious symptoms, it's on you to proactively request tests/medecine.

This is why I'm bullish on AI doctors, free from the negative incentives of an overbooked practitioner's schedule.

You're not wrong, but it's more complicated than that. Some Japanese wear them for fashion reasons, just because everybody else is wearing one. Some (usually women) because wearing a mask means you don't have to wear lipstick in public, which means you can get out the door faster in the morning. And a lot of people (wrongly) believe that a mask helps keep you from getting sick. If only the sick wore them you wouldn't see nearly as many as you do on the streets in Tokyo.

if you sneeze into the mask you walk around rest of the day with a wet mask with phlegm in it?

makes no sense to me.

Masks are also worn for privacy and social anxiety. They can be fashionable [0].

And, it's sad to even have to mention this, but as an added bonus for the dystopia we seem to be headed into, they also hinder mass surveillance. Apparently there are/were attempts to ban masks during the unrest in Hong Kong.

I recall this video [1] where people say they like how masks keep their faces warm, and they can feel free to sing to a song in public without feeling embarrassed. :)

[0] https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=face+mask+fashion

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qW67Hd7RJgQ

Social anxiety? They'd make communication more difficult not less.

Social anxiety manifests differently for different people. Some prefer to stay as "invisible" as possible, some don't like other people focusing on their face.

Aren't the main benefits of the mask the fact that you don't touch your face as much with potentially infected hands, and any sudden coughs or sneezes from the wearer are contained in the mask for others' benefit?

It's the opposite, when you are wearing one of those masks you touch your face more often. It also is a warm damp environment for bacteria. Now if you are sick and you are travelling to the doctors or something, then yes, a mask is a good idea. If you are healthy and trying not to be sick a mask is a bad idea, gloves and frequent handwashing with soap and water is a much better plan.

> It's the opposite, when you are wearing one of those masks you touch your face more often.

What?? How do you figure that?

People adjust the masks often. They aren't very comfortable and it's unpleasant to wear them for long, they can feel itchy which promotes face touching. The seal around your mouth probably won't be great unless you've been fit-tested as well so you'll be tempted to touch there.

All of those sound like issues that would be fixed by using better masks, that fit snugly and feel comfortable, and can be washed or even medicated, instead of the very cheap disposables.

Where are you getting your stories from? I don't see people keep touching to adjust. People in Japan are used to wearing them for the pollen seasons.

Why would you touch your face more often? At least you won't have a direct contact with your hands. Besides, why do you think putting on a mask and washing hands are somehow mutually exclusive?

To adjust the mask. You won't have direct contact with your hands, but the mask is a better environment for disease than your skin is, so touching it instead of your skin isn't any better.

If the masks don’t seal during regular breathing, how are they going to contain a cough or a sneeze?

They catch the water droplets.

...they’ll still blast out through the openings. That’s like saying putting a toilet seat down prevents fecal matter from coating your bathroom (it doesn’t)

If it's a fabric variety facemask, I bet it absorbs a lot of the droplets. Not perfect, probably better than a smooth plastic facemask.

Quantity matters. Both the size of the aerosol cloud generated from a cough/sneeze and the number and size of the droplets produced is reduced while wearing a mask.

Stopped completely? No. Reduced enough to be a useful measure in some circumstances? Yes.

If I were going out and genuinely worried about inhaling something, I'd skip surgical masks and N95 disposables and just wear a sealed half mask using P100 filters. They're way more comfortable than either of the disposables, and provide much better filtration. Since they use exhaust valves, they may not provide much protection to others from your own potential pathogens, although I would expect some droplet suppression simply from the redirection of any exhalation through a small valve.

If the mask doesn't fit properly, you are MORE likely to touch your face to adjust it.

This is just false. Humans touch their mouths and noses all of the time. The mask makes you less likely to touch your lips or nostrils.

And provide soap at sinks in public bathrooms.

Is using the tap and soap of a public bathroom really reducing the chances of virus/bacteria infection? Or is it increasing them because the soap and tap carry viruses and bacteria themselfes?

Not sure if you've been to Japan but they have some of the cleanest public facilities I've seen in spite of all the traffic. I'm sure people are coming through multiple times a day to wipe down all fomites.

Maybe. But does that answer my question?

If you touch the soap and the tap, that will surely transfer germs to your hands that the person before you left there?

I believe I did answer your question. Washing your hands will always be better than not. Many modern buildings also have automated water/soap/towel dispensers. And you can always use the towel to open the door.

Yes, but on your way into the stall, you touched the stall door, and then you touched other things, including your clothing, which you didn't wash on the way out, only your hands.

Touching the soap doesn’t matter at all. You’re about to wash it all off your hands.

Soap and water definitely work to reduce infections, even when using a shared sink. Look up what happened in the 19th century when people finally figured this out and started hand washing regularly, infectious disease transmission in settings like hospitals dropped dramatically.

In the 19th century infections were cut drastically when hands were washed with water only. Imagine what soap can do.

They started from not washing hands between autopsies and surgeries though. Talk about low hanging fruit.

Germs probably survive better on your skin than on the cold metal tap in the bathroom. Food safe handwashing says use a paper towel to turn off the tap after you are done drying your hands with it.

Fomite - Wikipedia: A fomes or fomite is any inanimate object that, when contaminated with or exposed to infectious agents can transfer disease to a new host. E.g. tap, couch, bench, hat.

New word to me and I have a pretty good vocab, so

Not unless you go out of your way to avoid touching everything. The act of washing with soap and water removes your personal fecal bacteria and turning off the water replaces it with whatever filth is on the knobs. Ditto if you touch the door knob/handle on the way out.

Use a paper towel on the door knob to avoid infection.

Most public bathrooms have automatic taps now that I see.

Most public bathrooms also have automatic doors (if you wait long enough)

HN, where techies attempt to make logical arguments for why they don't wash after they shit

Why not HN, where techies try to understand processes which may seem counterintuitive once you actually start thinking about them?

Sensor tap + sensor liquid soap dispenser + automatic doors. No touching required.

And what about those hand dryers? Do they just blow droplets containing the virus around the place?

Air driers have shown to be terrible for hygiene. But they're convenient and save paper.

Convenient for me? No, I either stand there forever or leave with semi-wet hands. Paper towels work much faster and more effective, but the decision is made by facilities.

Your hands dry much quicker under a hand dryer if you rub them together. I see so many people who just leave their hands flaccid and it takes a lot longer

Air dryers also leave you with nothing to open the door with.

That drives me nuts... Need to always carry some paper towels on hand for times like that.

I keep wondering why bathroom doors aren't designed to swing outwards by default. Then you could open them without touching a handle.

I always assumed it was firecode

(i.e. a fire in the bathroom creates a vacuum which prevents the door from opening outward. maybe that’s idiotic)

I only know what the Internet says so this may or may not be correct.

1. Inward opening is probably less inclined to disperse bathroom air into the hallway outside.

2. You're probably less likely to smack someone with a door opening into a hallway. (Or course, someone entering might do it to someone exiting a bathroom but most people are probably at least somewhat trained to exercise caution under those circumstances.)

3. If anything, I'd think fire code would favor door opening out given that's the general rule.

I think doors on the emergency exit route always open outwards so that they can open in a stampede. You'd usually have push bars on them instead of a regular handle too.

Eh, all the studies I've seen that show some dramatic difference have been funded by paper towel producers and used poor methodology. I believe research by the Mayo Clinic has shown that air dryers and paper towels are roughly equivalent for hygienic purposes.

The Japanese solution is everyone carrying their own personal small towel.

> most of air is actually escaping through the edges of the mask and around the nose.

Why is that a problem? My expectation is that what matters is:

1. Air that you inhale comes through the mask filter. It's not necesarily the case that inhaling and exhaling have symmetric effects. When you exhale, you increase air pressure inside the mask, which pushes it away from your face and opens the seals around the edge. When you inhale, I expect it would seal tighter. You can exhale while wearing a swimming mask and bubbles go everywhere. That doesn't mean the mask isn't otherwise water tight.

2. Aerosol particles from infected people coughing and sneezing get caught by the mask and don't go into your airways.

3. You don't touch your face with your hands.

The masks aren’t fine enough to trap germ particles coming in. There are such masks (n95) but these are more expensive, and require fitting and training to use. The off the shelf masks people are using do nothing for healthy people.

"Well, Technically", 3-ply masks are fine enough to trap germ particles. They consist of a woven:non-woven:woven layer, the non-woven layer blocking nanometer particles. If you look at a n95 mask, it has the same woven:non-woven:woven layer structure.

The problem of 3-ply masks is that 10-25% of the air you inhale leak from the side/nose, bypassing the filter. n95 mask "fixes" the problem by tight(er) fitting, not by additional filtering layers.

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

> training to use

I keep hearing this but don't understand. What exactly needs training?

Common sense

Typically it's about putting the straps on correctly and properly adjusting the nose bridge. When you don't put it on properly (i.e. straps above and below the ear, nose bridge properly adjusted) it'll be much less effective.

See https://www.bu.edu/ehs/files/2014/08/N95-Respirators-Trainin...

#2 is only true if you get a proper mask and wear it properly. N95 or better. #3 is always true but it is of limited (near zero) value if you aren't also using other methods, namely washing hands.

#1 is not true at all unless you get a proper mask, with a filter, and use it properly. Most people are walking around with a mask they got off the shelf at Walmart that is acting about as effectively as a halloween costume.

N95+ masks are expensive. Currently $20 per mask on Amazon.

> N95+ masks are expensive. Currently $20 per mask on Amazon.

They're not that expensive. That's price gouging, and I'd be worried about them being counterfeit. I have no way of evaluating their effectiveness at home.

I bought a box of 10 3M N95 valved masks three days ago at Ace Hardware for $24.95.

I bought a box of 3 for $20 yesterday from an eBay seller with a good reputation. There's a chance I've been scammed, but I think lower than on Amazon.

Probably not counterfeit, just automated scalping/drop-shipping. Rampant on Amazon these days.

If there aren't counterfeits yet, they'll be coming.

You should be fit-tested with an N95 as well. I had a job where it was required yearly and different brands and sizes work better for different people.

The cheapest N95 masks are around $3 retail ($6 for a pack of 2).

The masks are going for $60+ per mask on eBay right now. And virtually impossible to find on store shelves.

Is that a problem? Yes... like I said and shown in my experiment that you can repeat yourself, most masks are like toys, not air sealed or fitted properly and a lot of air gets through the sides, doesn't matter if you breathe in or out, gaps are still there (you will notice cold air entering on the side of the mask when you breathe in, especially if you worn the mask for a while and it gets a little soggy).

Of course, don't get me wrong.. they do work to a degree if fitted properly with the right grade of filtet, but the problem that people are putting too much faith in these things, especially the ones you buy from the combinis..

Most masks won't filter the virus. N95 can only filter particles greater than 0.3 microns and the corona virus is around 0.16 microns.

The masks are more for stopping behavioral habits for non-infected people like touching your mouth and nose but then you could touch your eyes too...

The masks are more for the infected people who could sneeze and spread the virus particles much further than if blocked by the mask.

> N95 can only filter particles greater than 0.3 microns and the corona virus is around 0.16 microns.

The virus spreads in much larger drops of fluid.

>corona virus is around 0.16 microns

But virus particles aren't floating around in the air infecting people, it's spread mostly through respiratory droplets. Not saying that a surgical mask will protect you, but it's not because the virus is too small.

virus particles really are in the air infecting people.

I'm pretty sure N95 just tells you how many particles are filtered, and the sizes and for which size ranges it is more or less effective depend on the specific piece. Also, droplets are bigger than the naked virus particles and will get caught by the filter.

> Aerosol particles from infected people coughing and sneezing get caught by the mask and don't go into your airways

Even if the masks were capable of filtering out the virus, the above wouldn't matter. If the virus hits your eyes or tear ducts you've got it. This is why wearing a mask protects others but not yourself.

Then again, most people elsewhere dont wear masks at all and dont stay at home when they are sick. While there is definitely less stigma for staying home, people still dont want to do it and act offended when you complain about them being sick in work.

> Also, there is a culture of not staying home when you're sick

That's been my experience in the US, but in Japan? While briefly living there, I was shocked when my 22 year old neighbor stayed home because of a common cold.

I suspect it is more company/occupation specific. High paying white collar workers are probably much more likely to be able to stay home. Low pay workers, likely have much less vacation benefits and all and must come to work. Me specifically I have over enough PTO with no prior vacation commitments that a week off it not a problem.

"High paying white collar workers" or even mediocre paid white collar workers are more likely to be working from home when sick.

I have never had a job where I felt comfortable and able to take a sick day because I had "just" a cold, but since I've had an office job where working from home was allowed, I would also not feel comfortable coming into the office sick.

Yes, only certain masks will even do anything. But...

Even then you need to make sure the mask fits. In hospitals, they do tests to find the right fit for nurses and doctors to check airflow.

They can be a good tool in certain situations, but random people placing a bunch of faith in them over other solutions is probably not helping.

Unfortunately it takes 2 weeks to show symptoms.

But luckily most of the contamination happens through cough, so that these people that don't show symptoms are also less contagious.

The Mybusters really do a great job of explaining contamination visually in this segment. https://youtu.be/k1j8bh8_O_Q

You don't want to be in the same building as a sick person, let alone anywhere near them in a smaller space like an office or restroom.

That video doesn't cover aerial contamination. The kind it shows is just hand-to-hand, then hand-to-face. Don't touch your face, and the germs stay on the outside of your hands, far from your mucus membranes. I've had very good results from this.

And some case studies of disease clusters have strongly suggested asymptomatic transmission. Asymptomatic individuals who spread it to a bunch of family members despite having no symptoms, then tested positive for the disease themselves once identified.

There's no containing it at this point, the best you could do is slow it down until there's a vaccine.

What's worse is that they take their masks off to sneeze so they can continue using the same mask.

I'm surprised this a top comment on such a popular submission.

To give this reply a little perspective, I'm from Taiwan and currently live in Vancouver.

It is very disingenuous to conclude what's happening in Japan is because of (the mask, and sick leave) culture. It is what makes me nervous about North America's preparedness. I'm assuming you are from NA since US CDC keeps telling the public that masks aren't effective. IMO they're just saying that to not cause a panic of people grabbing masks. Plus, they have a point. Most North Americans just aren't used to wearing one, so might make the wearers touch their faces even more. This is not true in a lot of Asian countries.

The general public in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong are all very accustomed to people wearing masks in public places, especially on mass transit systems. The density is just night and day compared to most of North America except maybe New York. Some wear it to stop the spread of disease, other comments have mentioned being a substitute for make-up, or also common: as a face shield when riding bicycles or scooters in the winter (much like a ski mask). Anyways, the point is that it is extremely common place. If you've worn it a couple of times you won't keep touching it.

> One of the problems is that they put too much confidence in face masks.

The mask is just the first line of defense. No one thinks masks are the be-all and end-all solution. After the outbreak in Iran, I'm seeing more and more Middle Easterners wear masks on the street. I'll bet you money when it starts spreading locally in North American communities you are going to see more people wear masks no matter their skin color or 'culture' (if they can get any). Check out the Italians wearing masks. [1]

> Most of these masks are just toys and not air tight at all.

Plenty of others corrected you on this so I won't go into it much. Basically, it's to block droplets (from leaving you and attached to other people and places like handles on buses etc.) It's not filtration. It also acts as a barrier if you are in close contact to someone who is sick.

> Also, there is a culture of not staying home when you're sick.

This annoys me the most. Us working in the technology sector have generous sick day policies, or even better remote work policies. But most people don't. There are plenty of people of all ages and colors and backgrounds that cough openly during my morning commute. This culture HAS to change but it's definitely not limited just Asia, let alone Japan.

1. https://www.gazettenet.com/Italy-rushes-to-contain-Europe-s-...

Unfortunately Wuhan experience showed that home isolation doesn't work. Caretakers will get infected. People also have needs that will make them or their caretakers go outside.

How did you reach the conclusion that home isolation doesn't work? Seems quite hyperbolic.

It works and is part of the whole solution. A clear downside is caretakers/food delivery can get infected, but it is much harder to spread.

The data shows that isolation is helping [1], China minus the outside world shows diminishing new cases in China.

[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-cases/

That is the point: China does not do home isolation. Wuhan had no choice but to try that in the beginning and it did not work. Things only started to improve when Wuhan were able to collect patients into quarantine sites.

Ebola is closer to what you're describing. 2-21 days to show symptoms and you're only contagious after symptoms arise. Isolation 100% works.

Corona is closer the flu/common-cold in terms of transmission.

Quarantining patients is too late. The viral point is the 14-21 day incubation period where patients aren't showing symptoms yet very able to spread the disease, which is the whole reason why it's so scary and affecting the world markets.

If Wuhan removed home isolation and everyone was allowed to go back to the old way of life, the virus would spread again.

I'm not sure how you can argue against home isolation. I haven't been convinced of what you claim; that it isn't helping.

Incubation is typically 4 to 7 days. Home isolation depends on compliance. Patients and their families will be hard pressed to comply if their medical and other needs can not be met.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com