Hacker News Reader

Comment by frankreyes | Hacker News Reader

> N95

Did you read the article? No you didn't.

>>> But, wait, hold on. What about N-95 masks, as opposed to lower-quality surgical or cloth masks? “Makes no difference — none of it,” said Jefferson. >>>

Do you think that COVID is the first virus ever to come to humanity?

Do you think that nobody ever thought about the effectiveness of face masks?

Do you think that somehow face masks lost effectiveness after 2020 but before they were effective?

No. No. No.

Scientists knew all along that face masks didn't work.

Edit:

>>> Compared to masks, N95 respirators conferred superior protection against CRI (...) and laboratory-confirmed bacterial (...), but not viral infections or ILI ...[influenza-like illness] <<<

COVID-19 is a virus, and an ILI.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747

View on HN

> Scientists knew all along that face masks didn't work.

No.

Masks were not mandatory here [1], they were not even recommended in the beginning. Later masks were recommended [2] in public transport during rush hours during a 6 month period in 2021. The reasoning for not recommending masks in the beginning was that there were too little data supporting the effectiveness of masks. So scientist did not "know" for certain.

I am not sure we can discuss this issue yet, there are still too many with non scientific agenda engaged in the debate.

[1] Sweden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_masks_during_the_COVID-19... [2] EDIT: I said mandatory, it was not.

I gave scientific evidence of both and after studies that agreed each other, but you insist of spinning this in terms of politics...

When actions contradict scientific evidence it's all about politics, no disagreement there.

In your example of Sweden, I'd say it's a prisoner's dilemma politicians are forced to follow suit on what other countries are doing. It happened in my country that the National Health Minister had to resign under pressure of ineptitude, not following international practices, and corruption during pandemic.

But your statement about evidence, it's simply not true.

Go back and read one more time my two scientific pieces of evidence. Here there are again:

Before: https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747

After: https://archive.is/sWXis

Your first link is a meta analysis which does not say masks don’t work. It says that they do work, but complains about the lack of data and it’s inconsistency (presumably this meta analysis hopes to help resolve that issue).

> This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection.

Your second link is to an opinion writer with no scientific background who infamously wrote his first opinion piece in the NYTimes denying the scientific evidence for climate change, but worse, with so many errors it needed a whole bunch of corrections appended to it.

Your “scientific pieces of evidence” are (a) not evidence for what you claim they’re evidence for, and (b) not scientific.

> Your first link is a meta analysis which does not say masks don’t work.

No, I already copied the relevant piece of text. Here is one more time:

>>> Compared to masks, N95 respirators conferred superior protection against CRI (...) and laboratory-confirmed bacterial (...), but not viral infections or ILI ...[influenza-like illness] <<<

> Your second link is to an opinion writer with no scientific background

No. Click on the link on the first sentence and you can read the original scientific study. Here is the link:

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...

Read the article. It says that face masks, surgical masks, and N95 provide no benefits.

You’re right. Doctors and surgeons and nurses have been subjecting themselves to the discomfort of wearing face masks for decades before anyone ever heard of COVID because they didn’t work.

Masks for doctors and nurses in hospitals is to prevent blood spills and other liquids or large enough stuff. Not viruses.

For example a dentist that wants to prevent having blood or saliva splashed in their face when operating.

I have an actual mask with an air filter for viruses. It costs a lot of money, it covers hermetically my whole face including eyes, and each filter only lasts for 30 minutes under viral environments.

In general the best you can get for virus protection is a pressure positive suit:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_pressure_personnel_...

Masks are worn in operating theatres in part to prevent contamination of the open wounds that they are working in. Is this not common knowledge?

It prevents saliva which contains bacteria from leaving the surgeons face and causing infections

Yes, because saliva spills and "aerosol" are two different things...

Aerosol is when water and liquid particles remains in suspension in the air, just like moisture, mist, a perfume or fragrance.

And that's what spreads the virus. COVID transmission is with aerosol.

Face masks, including those in hospitals, don't block aerosol

Reply on news.ycombinator.com