(no title)
ConorSheehan1 | 2 years ago
It's odd to put the introduction of hand washing at hospitals in 1800s Vienna and doubt over mask effectiveness against the spread of covid19 in the same category. They seem like opposites to me.
Sure they're both going against the scientific consensus of the time but there are some key differences.
In both cases, people don't want to change their behavior, but questioning masks is on the side of doing nothing.
There are no downsides to wearing a mask. When there's a new disease and we're not sure how to slow it's progress, but we have something that might help with no downside i.e. mask wearing, might as well try it right? And in retrospect it's pretty clear it was effective.
During the pandemic, I'd rather see scientists coming up with new more effective measures than squabbling over whether the existing measures are effective.
mike_hearn|2 years ago
They cost money and require effort. Therefore, there are downsides.
Defining a set of actions as literally cost free is a logical fallacy. Nothing is ever cost free. The moment you do this you're obliged to engage in that action 24/7 for the rest of your life, immediately and indefinitely, as any possible benefit would justify doing it - even imagined benefits that exist only in the realm of future hypotheticals. Worse, once someone makes this error, they start to believe everyone else is irrational because why would they not engage in this completely downside-free behavior too?
it's pretty clear it was effective.
The article mentions the Cochrane Review which rigorously concluded the opposite. However you don't need a meta-study. Community masking was justified on the claim that it would create a downward inflection in the case numbers. Go to ourworldindata and select COVID case graphs for a few countries you're not familiar with, then try to figure out when they imposed or removed mask mandates by searching for the inflections. You won't be able to because no such inflections were ever created. So mask mandates had no impact when judged by their own (stated) goals.
shiftingleft|2 years ago
Do you mean this one?
"Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.
It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive. Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask-wearing itself reduces people's risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses."
https://www.cochrane.org/news/statement-physical-interventio...
kubb|2 years ago
When Covid started I stopped getting sick in the winter. Before the pandemic I had gotten sick at least twice per year with some virus: sore throat, fatigue, sneezing, all that. It started again when the measures were relaxed. Of course this doesn't qualify as evidence for mask effectiveness, but I wonder if anyone had the same experience as me?
wozniacki|2 years ago
I can't believe that there are no substantial studies that have studied the ability of consumer grade surgical masks ( and/or N95s) in preventing common illnesses, very reliably when used regularly.
Why aren't these things conclusively studied, beyond any degree of doubt?
depressedpanda|2 years ago
I used to get really bad colds 3-5 times a year, for as long back as I can remember (afaik, I never got Covid, though). Now, it's been longer than a year since I last got sick.
However, I only wore a mask when forced to, as mask usage was generally only recommended and almost never mandatory during the pandemic.
Rather than masks, I think the most likely reason is that people who get sick nowadays are much more likely to stay at home, and probably also that everyone washes their hands more often.
Thiez|2 years ago
VK538FY|2 years ago
mypastself|2 years ago
alfnor|2 years ago
skrebbel|2 years ago
I’ll never understand why people keep repeating this. I know multiple people who seriously struggled with the mask. Ranging from basic stuff such as “it fogs up my glasses so I can’t see well and it gives me a headache” all the way to “I get a panic attack if I wear one for longer than 5 minutes”.
These people all pretty much stayed in the house for as long as the mask mandates lasted. That’s a long time to look at the same four walls!
mjparrott|2 years ago
almostnormal|2 years ago
metalspot|2 years ago
this is objectively false. it is generally accepted in the scientific community that wearing masks for an extended period of time is dangerous and leads to respiratory illnesses.
wddkcs|2 years ago
jabradoodle|2 years ago
fzeroracer|2 years ago
sneed-oil|2 years ago
Besides the obvious effort required and the monetary costs, as somebody who wears glasses and commutes by bike and train I can name a couple others. After biking to the train station my breath is heavier than normal, and having to put a mask on when entering the train made my glasses fog up, so I would usually wear it under the nose (even those with a valve, because they still made it hard to breathe after biking, although a little easier). Otherwise I would be unable to use my phone nor laptop and I would have nothing to do for most of the commute. My glasses would also fog up when entering indoors locations during the winter, so I would have to clean my glasses and mess around with the mask to make the air come out from the bottom. There's also no clear upside for me given that I rarely get sick, the last time I had a fever was in 2022 and the time before that was 2017.
nradov|2 years ago
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6
defrost|2 years ago
Further:
ie. They don't believe the matter is settled by any means.The most interesting part is the selection criteria.
Looking at the section Characteristics of included studies it appears some effort was made to trawl two decades of global trials in order to find those least likely to have any good conclusion.
Many of the trials look at the effectiveness of low level encouragement to try an intervention at a time and low location with relatively low risks, leading to intermittent uptake and noisy data.
RandomLensman|2 years ago
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK|2 years ago
mensetmanusman|2 years ago
Tao3300|2 years ago
salmonellaeater|2 years ago
You can't see people's full facial expressions. I wouldn't be surprised if the toddlers in daycare during 2020-2021 end up with deficits in social perception. For adults who already have a hard time inferring other people's emotions, masks make it worse.
You can't identify people as well if they're wearing a mask.
Aerobic exercise and hard physical labor are difficult or impossible wearing a mask (try breathing through a mask once it's saturated with sweat, blocking the airflow).
It fogs up glasses.
I'm sure there are others, but you get the point. Wearing masks has real downsides that need to weighed against the protection they offer.
marsven_422|2 years ago
[deleted]
exodust|2 years ago
Except for wearing a mask, which is inherently a downside compared with not wearing a mask.
Pollution. Disposable masks litter the streets and end up in waterways.
When masks are mandated in general settings, workplaces and anywhere usually unmasked, there are downsides. Even in aged care, the faces of visiting family and friends are now obscured. Residents in many cases would not see the unmasked faces of their own family again.
jacob171714|2 years ago