Hacker News Reader

Comment by SignalNotSecure | Hacker News Reader

You don't need to wear a mask if you're fully vaccinated because the vaccine is over 90% effective at preventing infection

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21257987v...

View on HN

And that's the kind of innumerate thinking I don't understand. Masks aren't an either/or thing. Say masks are maybe 60% effective (there's no real consensus and good science is hard to come by). A mask-wearing vaccinated person is now 96% protected. Add that to staying outside (maybe another 75% or so?) and you get to 99%. Every bit helps, which is one of the reasons why we're reaching herd immunity.

Now, you're right, there's a cost tradeoff. If everyone is at 99% it would be pure insanity to close restaurants, say. But... masks? Leave them on, until it's dead. Again, this is the cheapest mitigation we have. Roll back every other protection first. Send people back to the office. Open up the stadiums. Start hugging again. Lift the visa restrictions. Visit the grandparents. Do all that stuff first before relaxing mask use.

Just wanted to say you've made very good points.

I think it isn’t necessarily innumeracy to move past napkin math 18 months on. People have had the time to see the results of several cycles of behavior modification and perhaps aren’t interested in participating further.

While you’re at it why don’t we mandate everyone wear latex gloves all the time? No biggie.

And just always have hand sanitizer on your person. Just a small bottle so not much of a problem.

Can we just mandate people select a group of 100 people they will interact with? Almost nobody has more friends + family to see than that so it’s hardly an issue when you think about it.

You have this backwards: mandates must be continually justified beyond a reasonable doubt, not the reverse. Remember: mandates are dictating how others live their lives. Just because something isn’t that big a deal to you or aligns with your values doesn’t mean imposing that on someone else with the threat of government enforcement is reasonable in the slightest. Wear your mask, they are tools used to good effect, but requiring others to wear them is a step that should be continually challenged with all available true evidence and aggregate personal values - as should any mandate or law.

This is a giant list of strawmen. I'm not arguing for a mask mandate, I'm saying that masks as mitigation have been and continue to be good strategies (and in particular very cheap ones) and that we want to continue to use them until the pandemic is actually controlled (vs. just shrinking) and not incessantly mock people who continue to use effective means of disease control.

It’s telling how any mention of the fact that masks aren’t really that effective instantly is branded ‘mocking’. Especially while the pro mask Facebook groups have spent the last year pointing fingers at ‘anti mask Karens’.

I think some of your points are valid.*

However, if people are to wear masks until covid is truly gone, you may be asking people to wear masks forever. I think once covid is less of a population risk than a bad flu, all mandates should be dropped.

You should also disregard anti-vaxers* from the stats. If they want to die, fine. So at this point we have anti-vaxers, kids under 12, and some very rare medical cases left in the US now. With community spread where it is (low and dropping), the flu is genuinely scarier for kids under 12, and likely to kill more.

There is no quantitative reason for any restrictions at this point.

* I'll note the first thing that should have been prioritized is un-banning vaccines. *Anti vaxers in this context means anyone who at this point has had months to get a free vaccine and still hasn't, they have now earned the label.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com