Hacker News Reader

Comment by blakesterz | Hacker News Reader

Looks like what we've been hearing is backed up by this study:

"Interpretation The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance."

I've not seen any recommendations for public use of eye protection, is that being done anywhere? Are some places recommending wearing some type of goggles or something?

View on HN

That’s because this isn’t a “study”, it’s a review.

A review introduces no new information - it summarizes the existing literature.

This is the meta-review commissioned by the WHO to investigate the value of PPE, and it is notable because it aggregates a number of low-quality studies and attempts to statistically re-weight their data to arrive at a broader conclusion.

It’s notable for face masks, in particular, because it mixes data from hospital settings with community settings, along with respirators and surgical masks, source control and PPE, and attempts to draw a conclusion about “protectiveness” overall.

IIRC, some news reports stated Fauci mentioned something about eye-protection last week. Haven't heard anything more concrete than that. It makes sense, but... I doubt most people will do it. I wear glasses half the time, which... I dunno - may be slightly useful?

FWIW, as far as I am concerned, I would wear goggles if made mandatory or highly recommended (as long as the kind of recommended googles are sufficiently well described).

On that note I don't see anyone left wearing surgical or latex gloves outside now (Western Europe).

Because the gloves are mostly pointless, if not making the problem worse. It's better to not touch your face and sanitize your hands. All the cashiers here don't use gloves. They sanitize their hands after every transaction, they wear face masks, plexiglass shield around their station, and there is a limited number of people allowed in the store, with a 1m physical distance between customers enforced. This is the requirement in South-Western Ontario. So far it's working fantastic over here. All decisions have been informed by scientists and experts in their fields.

"They sanitize their hands after every transaction"

They use soap and water? Handwipes?

That must be killing any skin they have left. Gloves make so much sense for them. They make sense for everyone.

They use hand sanitizer. It contains moisturizer as well.

Gloves are scientifically proven not to work unless you replace them after every transaction, additionally most people do not know how to properly remove surgical gloves without contamination.

That makes sense overall. But they work for the worker who wears them (just not the public). Longer term healthy workers won't be sick and spread as much.

Taking off gloves shouldn't be an issue. I would think after a 4 hour shift you would take them off and wash hands because they would be sweaty anyhow and you would smell of rubber.

I've worn them when browsing in a store, but the point of the gloves in that case is to prevent my transmitting it to someone else via a point of contact and not to protect myself from receiving the virus.

Transparent face shields might actually be nicer to wear than masks, if that's all you needed, because you can still see each other. I saw someone on the street using one once.

Unfortunately, they haven't been studied much, and I've seen a couple reports that face shields alone are not enough and they are best combined with masks.

Still, a face shield alone would probably be better than nothing.

> Transparent face shields might actually be nicer to wear than masks, if that's all you needed, because you can still see each other.

Alone, face shields do little to nothing to protect people from the wearer.

My dentist wore a full-face clear plastic shield yesterday, which obviously provides eye protection and let him work while staying protected. I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes standard practice ever more.

That’s not true if the particles are aerosolized (why dentistry is so high risk) and simply go around the face shield into the eye. Eye googles would be far more effective.

Do glasses help, or do you need goggles?

Glasses obviously help and is better than nothing, it is a screen in front of your eyes.

Most footage during the Wuhan lockdown had a near majority wearing goggles in places like grocery stores.

Yeah, they were wearing swim goggles, like this Irish badass in Wuhan at the end of January:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luztqxUBvZo

Reply on news.ycombinator.com