US considers cloth face masks for the public
bbc.com
bbc.com
Speculation here, but I think if everyone had worn face coverings (i.e. scarves or even masks) early on, we wouldn't have as many cases in the US today. Combined with social distancing, we could have even possibly flattened the curve.
edits: grammar
And Florida just issued their shelter in place - this country’s hate of science doomed it to the number of cases it was going to get regardless.
If the CDC said to drink your own pee, the majority of ppl wouldn't hesitate.
Even in article, we are talking cloth face masks. That will provide even less marginal protection to the wearer from contracting the virus. But it will reduce the spread from an infected person. The goal isn't to wear a mask to protect yourself, the goal is to not spread the virus as an asymptomatic carrier
It's not fruitful to worry about a hypothetical. I worry more about asking many Americans to do something they perceive as altruistic.
edit: it is rude to call something FUD if it isn't. I didn't say no benefit, I said marginal. And I think everyone greater risk in a general healthcare systemic collapse, which is what is on the table. If you weigh all the risks, until there are enough for all medical purposes they should go to medical wearers. Then it should be triaged by vulnerability. This seems really common sense. And obviously, a homemade cloth mask, scarf, or t-shirt when forced into a situation around other people is basic common sense, and I didn't feel the need to say it. That's why I'm talking about N95s, not masks, and certainly not cloth masks that are homemade.
edit: downvotes are frustrating. I am almost restating the article verbatim to correct misunderstandings in the comments here about what and why is being suggested.
However, on Wednesday, Dr Adams told Good Morning America that the CDC had been asked to review its guidelines on masks, because "we've learned there's a fair amount of asymptomatic spread" - although he stressed that medical masks should still be left to health care professionals who needed them most.
and
However, more and more health experts now say there are benefits.
They argue that the public use of masks can primarily help by preventing asymptomatic patients - people who have been infected with Covid-19 but are not aware, and not displaying any symptoms - from unknowingly spreading the virus to others.
edit: check out https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22752501 for resources that say indicate otherwise on mask wearing even benefiting the wearer. Don't be an antisocial asshole and buy or wear N95s and give them to healthcare workers, who face a much higher viral loads than you, until supply constraints are resolved.
There are people who can fit them properly. Use or misuse is a personal responsibility, like most things in life.
In my experience (as a peon employed by target) about 10% of people are wearing the correct mask (assuming they're trying to protect themselves) and appear to have it fitted properly. (CVS pharmacy people aren't included in that number because they probably received training on how to wear their masks.)
Here's the paper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HLrm0pqBN_5bdyysOeoOBX4p...
Protection achieved by wearing facemasks of any kind was between 90% and 100%.
Marginal > none
> Even in article, we are talking cloth face masks. That will provide even less marginal protection to the wearer from contracting the virus. But it will reduce the spread of an infected person. The goal isn't to wear a mask to protect yourself, the goal is to not spread the virus as an asymptomatic carrier
Not true, getting a lower dose of the virus initially gives your body more time to develop antibodies.
Can you substantiate that claim with any evidence, preferably by citing published articles? I'm not disagreeing, I just wasn't able to find any myself.
And From CEBM [1]:
> The initial dose of virus and the amount of virus an individual has at any one time might worsen the severity of COVID 19 disease. Viral load is a measure of the number of viral particles present in an individual. Higher SARS-CoV-2 viral loads. might worsen outcomes, and data from China suggests the viral load is higher in patients [2] with more severe disease. The amount of virus exposure at the start of infection – the infectious dose – may increase the severity of the illness and is also. linked to a higher viral load
[0] https://youtu.be/cFB_C2ieW5I?t=771
[1] https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/sars-cov-2-viral-load-and-the-...
[2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...
To protect others from you however, you probably just need to make sure you don't spit, and don't touch your face. A cloth mask could help with both. Gloves may also help (having something on your hand can remind you not to touch your face).
Doctors & other exposed personnel need masks to protect themselves. The rest of us likely mostly need to protect them from us.
(Totally not a doctor, citation needed.)
And talking. We sometimes throw droplets with percussives such as P or T.
If we have a shortage of masks, either surgical or n95 respirators there are other things we can do to prioritize who gets them. I just don’t think lying / misleading the public about their effectiveness is the way to do it.
Like I said before I understand the need to prioritize, but there’s other ways to do that. Redirecting supply to medical facilities etc, which is already being done. Most people can’t even buy n95 respirators now even if they want to. No need to lie about their effectiveness in preventing spread.
I feel this was a really really bad move which will result in otherwise avoidable deaths from people arguing they shouldn’t do what officials say because they lied about such an important issue before.
> It feels like now the population has been taught to not wear masks and it’ll be an uphill battle to reverse that.
No masks is already the US status quo. In the same way propaganda told people not to buy them, they will be told to wear them and how to make them at home. It’s a pretty easy reversal when the message is demanded to be broadcast through all mediums.
Why is this not being broadcast from all possible media outlets? “Stay at home. If you just absolutely go out, wear a mask.” It’s really that simple.
You want 3 easy things a mask can help with?
1. Not being able to put your hands into your nose/mouth and remind you to not touch your face
2. Prevent the spread if you are asymptomatic but have it
3. Increase the chance you get a "low dose" even if you do get it (leading to a better outcome for you)
These things matter and will save lives. Even a cloth/homemade mask helps. The CDC lied when they said it didn't and they lied because they knew there weren't enough masks but in doing so they eroded public trust so when they finally do get around to asking people to wear a mask there will be those that won't now. Same way calling it "just the flu" continues to be parroted by people. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
Medicine has a history of shoddy study design and outright quackery, so without a good RCT, medically trained professionals are loath to prescribe some behavior.
There are studies that show how bad people are at wearing masks.
As for masks effectiveness, it's complicated. They might help filter particles, or prevent the particles you exhale from going/staying airborne. But you may also touch your face more and in more dangerous ways when you're wearing a mask.
There's also a very real risk of moral hazard, but people (see above) don't know the relative risks of social behavior vs masks. If people feel safe b/c they're wearing a mask, that's also self-defeating.
Other than countries that are currently wearing masks and are flattening the curve?
> But you may also touch your face more and in more dangerous ways when you're wearing a mask.
This is simply a terrible argument for a number of reasons, first and foremost: you do not get COVID-19 from touching your face. It has to get in through the mouth or nose.
> If people feel safe b/c they're wearing a mask, that's also self-defeating.
Even if it makes them safer?
I can't even deal with people that want to say "we don't know if masks help" then why are doctors and nurses wearing them?
Are there countries that are effectively flattening the curve without using masks?
> This is simply a terrible argument for a number of reasons, first and foremost: you do not get COVID-19 from touching your face. It has to get in through the mouth or nose.
It either gets in because you touch those places, or because you breathed in an aerosolized form through those places. (I'm assuming you breathe through your face) If a mask causes you to to aerosolize more, or contaminate your hands, then it isn't making you as safe as you thought.
> Even if it makes them safer?
Again, what's the evidence for this? A DOI would be sufficient.
> I can't even deal with people that want to say "we don't know if masks help" then why are doctors and nurses wearing them?
We don't know if masks help regular people. Normal people haven't been fitted or trained, and that means they are overwhelmingly likely to wear them incorrectly.
Again, we're back to moral hazard, only worse, because you aren't as protected as you thought. Bad protection can be worse than no protection, because it leads to a net increase in risk. For example (all numbers are made up) if you go out twice as often once you've got a mask, but the mask only reduces your risk of exposure by 40%, then yes, the mask has a protective effect, but you wearing the mask leads to a net increase in risk. You would have been better off not wearing the mask, and behaving more cautiously.
Trying to fit it into a altruistic or selfish category is a false dichotomy. The same for obeying stay at home orders. Just because a benefit is indirect (herd immunity benefit of universal vaccination, reducing r0 in a population from behavioral changes) doesn't mean it's not a benefit.
I've made this "single-serving site" to share with friends and family who aren't convinced yet: https://shouldiwearafacemask.com/