Hacker News Reader

Comment by bscphil | Hacker News Reader

I don't see any particular reason to trust the opinion section of the Boston Globe over the US Surgeon General or the WHO, but that's just me. I'm even more hesitant about calling that claim a "flat out lie". As far as I can tell, these are just two people with a point of view, who don't link to a single study on the matter.

Seriously though, do you have any evidence that the consensus of the medical profession is that getting the general, non-sick population to wear masks is useful in combating the crisis? I'm open to the possibility that it is, but remain rather skeptical.

View on HN

> do you have any evidence that the consensus of the medical profession is that getting the general, non-sick population to wear masks is useful in combating the crisis?

Yes:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3810906/

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712%2808%2901008-4...

"Wearing a face mask was a protective factor against influenza infection."

"The staff who wore surgical masks and N95 masks were significantly associated with non-infection."

"In compliant users, masks were highly efficacious."

Also common sense. If you wear a mask you reduce the probability that you transmit the virus. And, to a lesser extent, you reduce the probability that you are infected by the virus.

Claiming that "they are not effective" is simply false. Perhaps "lie" is too strong, but it was untrue and irresponsible considering the position he holds.

  "Wearing a face mask was a protective factor against influenza infection."

The key word there is influenza.

It's about the size of the particles (both COVID-19 and flu are 80–120 nm) not the type of virus.

Besides, the other links concern a SARS virus.

It is the consensus of medical professionals and officials in those countries that have demonstrated that they can greatly reduce the spread (China, South Korea, Japan).

It is not the consensus in countries that currently still see an explosion in cases.

Well the opinion section of the Boston Globe is also written by a person (in this case two people, with separate credentials listed at the bottom). The Surgeon General tweeting is also an "opinion section". And if you think that whatever the official government official says must be true, feel free to go browse the official POTUS twitter acount.

> if you think that whatever the official government official says must be true

This is something I definitely said.

I'm referring to your statement about trusting the surgeon general.

> I don't see any particular reason to trust the opinion section of the Boston Globe over the US Surgeon General or the WHO

Me: I think the statements of the US Surgeon General are usually trustworthy, at least more so than the opinion section of the Boston Globe.

You: you think that whatever the official government official says must be true

Do you see the issue here?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com