[HN Gopher] The case against masks at school
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The case against masks at school
        
       Author : hrl
       Score  : 157 points
       Date   : 2022-01-26 16:42 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theatlantic.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theatlantic.com)
        
       | elsonrodriguez wrote:
       | There have been numerous studies showing that mechanically N95
       | and equivalent masks can greatly reduce the emission of
       | coronavirus and influenza, and can also greatly reduce the intake
       | of coronavirus-sized particles.
       | 
       | That's why these types of articles always focus on mask mandate
       | effectiveness instead of mask effectiveness. How many schools
       | with mask mandates also have their lunch indoors with poor
       | ventilation? Can you wear a mask while eating? How many have
       | their noses sticking out all day? How many are wearing cloth
       | masks?
       | 
       | It's like having a kid constantly getting pinkeye from not wiping
       | their ass properly, and then saying toilet paper is pointless,
       | instead of teaching the kid how to wipe and wash properly.
        
         | Zanneth wrote:
         | It is the responsibility of public health to take all of these
         | variables into account before mandating countermeasures. The
         | fact that people are constantly placed in situations where mask
         | effectiveness is reduced or in some cases completely eliminated
         | should be evidence that mask mandates are pointless when
         | applied at scale.
        
           | uoaei wrote:
           | Very confusing how people seem to keep making the illogical
           | jump from "individuals follow a mask mandate improperly /
           | mask mandates are insufficiently specific to cover the actual
           | means of transmission" to "mask mandates are pointless".
           | 
           | Mask mandates _done poorly_ are pointless. Obviously. But it
           | is completely absurd to conclude that mask mandates _writ
           | large_ are pointless.
        
             | Zanneth wrote:
             | That was a poor choice of words on my part. Instead of
             | "pointless" I should have said "impractical." I think most
             | of us agree that we wouldn't want to live in a world where
             | kids are forced to wear N95 masks all day, with tape
             | binding them to their skin, with adults constantly
             | supervising their proper fit, and with absolutely no lunch
             | breaks or ability to drink fluids. If mask wearing done
             | poorly is the only realistic option, then we would be
             | better off without them altogether.
        
         | pcmoney wrote:
         | The kids are not allowed to interact at school. Their schools
         | are closed arbitrarily. They are taught that they are a vector
         | of disease. We make them eat outside on cold sidewalks in
         | freezing temperatures. The risk to children is very low.
         | 
         | Meanwhile, adults are going to crowded restaurants, bars,
         | concerts without masks in the same cities.
         | 
         | It is all a joke at the expense of our children.
         | 
         | When these kids are running our government and we are the
         | retirees dependent upon them etc. then the bill will come due
         | and we will deserve it.
        
         | naasking wrote:
         | > It's like having a kid constantly getting pinkeye from not
         | wiping their ass properly, and then saying toilet paper is
         | pointless, instead of teaching the kid how to wipe and wash
         | properly.
         | 
         | Poor adherence in young populations is exactly the point.
        
           | elsonrodriguez wrote:
           | There is a deep irony in that this conversation concerns
           | schools and yet we're here implying that it's pointless to
           | teach children anything.
        
             | naasking wrote:
             | Not sure how you go from "poor adherence on masks" to "it's
             | pointless to teach kids anything".
        
             | xdennis wrote:
             | If they keep failing at teaching something, then maybe
             | what's being taught is wrong, not who's taught.
             | 
             | It's like how left-handed kids have been taught to write
             | with their right hand: how many lefties must fail until
             | they realize writing with your left should be acceptable?
        
         | chaostheory wrote:
         | The article points out that children have been relatively safe
         | from COVID, which is true. The article doesn't really cite much
         | data to support its case. The studies it cites show a positive
         | benefit to masking that it fails to counter. What it also
         | completely ignores is that the masks are mainly to protect
         | teachers and the children's older guardians and care takers.
         | I'm tired of anti-maskers.
        
           | uoaei wrote:
           | Children are safe from _having debilitating symptoms due to
           | COVID_. I think it 's worth being precise with language
           | because the shorthand has been confusing for many people and
           | used as a bludgeon in the reopening-schools-debate. But of
           | course the real issue is children getting COVID from family,
           | bringing it to school, spreading it to other kids who then
           | give it to other parents. I have not seen analyses which
           | attempt to quantify the effect of closing schools while
           | taking this into account, but I'm sure they're out there.
        
             | TheCoelacanth wrote:
             | Also spreading it to their teachers, who are usually adults
             | and who usually don't want to get deadly diseases and may
             | not be willing to work without some precautions going
             | towards their safety.
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | The virus is endemic, we are all going to get it sooner
               | or later.
        
               | uoaei wrote:
               | No it is not and no we are not. You are advocating the
               | sacrifice of lives which are not your own, which is
               | unequivocally reprehensible.
        
               | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
               | I mean most experts agree that it is (or will be), soooo
               | yeah you should probably accept that and figure out how
               | to live your life accordingly, maybe just don't go into
               | public policy making though.
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | It is endemic. Its everywhere. Its mutating.
               | 
               | Humanity has never stopped the spread of similar
               | coronaviruses and even if we could the death rate/risk is
               | not bad enough to justify the cost (this isnt
               | smallpox/polio)
               | 
               | We have vaccines. They don't stop you from getting it or
               | transmitting it. They do lower probability of the
               | vaccinated person getting severe/fatal covid. Clearly a
               | personal health decision that should not be mandated
               | (although I would encourage it)
               | 
               | Mask are of marginal help. Mandates dont change actual
               | behavior.
               | 
               | Life goes on. (Me: triple vaxxed and have had Covid 2x)
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | If you don't want to contract it feel free to make
               | whatever personal decisions you think will prevent it.
               | 
               | Don't use your fear to control others and prevent them
               | from making their own decisions.
        
       | criddell wrote:
       | My kids attend a university in Canada and live in residence on
       | campus. They have had incredibly strict rules around masking and
       | gatherings. It's clear that they are only considering one
       | variable - number of infections - and it seems like they aren't
       | considering any other factors.
       | 
       | For example, in the dorm there is a common area with a piano.
       | Because of COVID, playing that piano is banned. Even if there was
       | a reasonable danger of contracting COVID from a piano, there are
       | also mental health benefits to playing music. It doesn't feel
       | like the piano ban is in the best interests of the people who
       | live there and I don't think the people who set the rules care
       | because they can't measure that. They can only measure
       | infections.
        
         | uxp100 wrote:
         | Reminds me of (now takeout only) restaurants which have their
         | bathrooms closed "for covid," or public drinking fountains
         | which are still closed "for covid." Not really much to due with
         | covid at this point I suspect. So it may not really be about
         | measuring infections at all, but that played piano makes noise
         | and requires tuning, and so administration would rather just
         | not, and now there is an excuse.
        
           | 908B64B197 wrote:
           | On the west coast I've seen parking at municipal parks
           | completely closed "for covid". Yet the parks remain open.
           | 
           | This means people just park in the streets around the parks.
           | What's that supposed to achieve?
        
           | moritonal wrote:
           | Many places have used Covid as an excuse to regress and
           | implement desired polices. Take for example the Tate Modern,
           | a museum in London. Under the argument of COVID you must have
           | a ticket to enter (previously free). You can get a ticket by
           | scanning a QR at the door, you simply have to give an name
           | and email.
           | 
           | You can see how they got to that place, so they can control
           | the density of visitors which is important because of COVID,
           | but it's also something they've wanted for years.
        
             | umvi wrote:
             | "never let a good crisis go to waste"
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | I'd imagine that's also for contact tracing.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | No one is actually doing meaningful contact tracing
               | anymore. It was a compete failure and waste of resources.
        
               | afavour wrote:
               | But is there still a requirement to get that data? It
               | might not be the Tate's choice.
        
               | autokad wrote:
               | contact tracing only works when a pandemic is in the
               | hundreds, maybe a few thousand tops. After that it
               | becomes too intractable to trace and also yields little
               | benefit.
        
         | rhino369 wrote:
         | And if its anything like American colleges, the draconian
         | restrictions don't actually stop the students from crowding
         | into over-packed apartment and house parties over the weekends.
        
           | dboreham wrote:
           | This has been my son's experience : masks required in the
           | classroom but the students spread disease (not just COVID --
           | Flu and colds as well) rampantly in the dorms.
        
         | abfan1127 wrote:
         | its the public health equivalent of the broken window fallacy.
        
           | toomanybeersies wrote:
           | I would've said it was more a case of Goodhart's law:
           | 
           | > When a metric becomes a target, it ceases to be a good
           | metric
           | 
           | The public health equivalent of the broken window fallacy
           | would be maximising the spread of disease in order to boost
           | the medical industry.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | huetius wrote:
         | This one-dimensional approach is especially bad since the
         | emergence of omicron, where number of infections doesn't even
         | capture the level of COVID danger.
        
         | throwaway22032 wrote:
         | This is the fundamental issue with coronavirus mitigation
         | measures. There are circumstances in which "drop everything"
         | makes sense - if coronavirus were ten times more fatal, we'd do
         | it naturally.
         | 
         | But in general, looking at life from a perspective of "what is
         | the minimum possible quality of life we can have" is depressing
         | and fundamentally incompatible with the human spirit.
         | 
         | I tend to think that people who operate in this way are
         | subhuman, in the genuine sense of the word - they seem more
         | like bureaucratic automatons than living beings with spirits
         | and hopes and dreams.
         | 
         | Like, yeah, I will take the risk of contracting coronavirus to
         | play the piano, because I want the piano in my life. The piano
         | is what life is, life is not simply breathing and eating.
        
           | jancsika wrote:
           | > I tend to think that people who operate in this way are
           | subhuman, in the genuine sense of the word - they seem more
           | like bureaucratic automatons than living beings with spirits
           | and hopes and dreams.
           | 
           | Quick capsule hypothesis-- you tend toward thinking in a way
           | that results in you having written the word "subhuman" on HN
           | because an active pandemic tends to increase feelings of
           | disgust in the affected population.
           | 
           | Did you consider that possibility?
           | 
           | Edit: wording
        
           | spookthesunset wrote:
           | For two years we've been asked to park our problems and to
           | act like literally all that matters is the spread of Covid.
           | Nothing else matters. Just a myopic fixation on the spread of
           | one highly infectious respiratory virus.
           | 
           | Even a year after vaccines we are still being asked to treat
           | Covid like it is the #1 priority in our lives. More important
           | than our well being, our mental health, our communities, our
           | children, or anything else.
           | 
           | Heaven help you if your value system is incompatible with
           | such an idea. Be prepared to be yelled at, called names, lose
           | your career, and become marginalized.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | "Even a year after vaccines we are still being asked to
             | treat Covid like it is the #1 priority in our lives. More
             | important than our well being, our mental health, our
             | communities, our children, or anything else."
             | 
             | Depends on where you live. There are many rural/red areas
             | that are basically back to normal.
        
             | subsubzero wrote:
             | The north star for most countries and cities has always
             | been cases over hospitalizations or deaths. With vaccine
             | intake high in most developed countries a covid infection
             | is like a cold or a bad flu for some. I think the time has
             | come to rethink this goal of cases being a metric to shut
             | down everything and let society return to some sense of
             | normalcy while still maintaining a safety mandate for those
             | with special conditions(who could potentially die from
             | covid).
             | 
             | Another thing to note, the CDC has mentioned that cloth
             | masks are not effective against omnicron, I know this
             | firsthand as my whole family wore them and we all spread it
             | to each other as the masks did not stop the spread despite
             | hospital levels of disinfection and extreme precaution.
             | With that being said most kids masks are cloth and surgical
             | masks or n95/kn95 masks(cdc says these are effective) are
             | not made for little kids. So whats going on is kids are
             | forced to wear masks that will not protect them against
             | omicron.
             | 
             | Lastly, although the sample size is low my daughter and
             | other kids in her class got covid and had zero symptoms or
             | very minor ones at worst(they were all fully vaccinated) so
             | I wonder what is the benefit of these extreme precautions
             | that don't really seem relevant based on government health
             | declarations(cloth masks don't work, kids[who don't have
             | serious medical issues] have good protection against covid
             | due to age).
        
               | hammock wrote:
               | Sounds like you are on a path to awakening so I don't
               | want to discourage you, but it might be worth sharing
               | additional data and context to parts of your comment.
               | 
               | >With vaccine intake high in most developed countries a
               | covid infection is like a cold or a bad flu for some.
               | 
               | That may be more driven by the mildness of Omicron than
               | it is by the protective effect of the vaccine. For
               | example, the latest data show that vaccinated (but not
               | boosted) are getting sick and dying at higher rates than
               | unvaccinated. One source (14 per 100k vs 10 per 100k): ht
               | tps://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11318/22-01-26-covi
               | d...
               | 
               | >Another thing to note, the CDC has mentioned that cloth
               | masks are not effective against omnicron
               | 
               | This is something that is in all likelihood not variant-
               | specific. In other words, cloth masks were always
               | ineffective, however with the increased transmissibility
               | of Omicron, this fact of ineffectiveness has become
               | readily apparent.
        
               | robocat wrote:
               | > One source (14 per 100k vs 10 per 100k):
               | 
               | Please do not cherry-pick data that has hidden
               | confounding variables. The data DOES NOT SHOW that
               | vaccinated (but not boosted) are getting sick and dying
               | at higher rates than unvaccinated. You are being severely
               | misleading with your statements as "facts".
               | 
               | Most importantly "In the last week from 08 January 2022
               | to 14 January 2022, in an age-standardised population,
               | the COVID-19 related death rate in individuals that
               | received a booster or third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine
               | was between 3.2 to 9.4 times lower than individuals who
               | are unvaccinated or have only received one or two doses
               | of a COVID-19 vaccine.". That directly contradicts your
               | "fact", and the reason is the simple one that your
               | numbers are not standardised for age i.e. more older
               | people are vaccinated so more vaccinated people die.
               | _This should not need to be repeated ad nausium_. Pay
               | attention to the facts and please stop misrepresenting
               | the truth.
               | 
               | From page 34 of that report:
               | 
               | "PLEASE READ BEFORE REVIEWING THE FOLLOWING TABLES AND
               | FIGURES There is a large risk of misinterpretation of the
               | data presented in this section due to the complexities of
               | vaccination data. A blog post by the UK Health Security
               | Agency (UKHSA), formerly Public Health England (PHE),
               | provides a comprehensive explanation of the biases and
               | potential areas for misinterpretation of such data. They
               | state that a simple comparison of COVID-19 case rates in
               | those who are vaccinated and unvaccinated should not be
               | used to assess how effective a vaccine is in preventing
               | serious health outcomes, because there are a number of
               | differences between the groups, other than the vaccine
               | itself, and these biases mean that you cannot use the
               | rates to determine how well the vaccines work. Below are
               | examples of some of the complexities and biases that need
               | to be taken into consideration when interpreting these
               | data. This is explained in more detail in our blog on the
               | PHS website." And from page 35: "There are likely to be
               | systematic differences and biases between the vaccinated
               | and unvaccinated groups, such as behaviour, vulnerability
               | and previous infection, that are unaccounted for when
               | comparing rates. As most of the population is vaccinated,
               | these differences become more evident and could create
               | bias in case/hospitalisation/death rates between
               | vaccinated and unvaccinated population."
        
               | hammock wrote:
               | >Most importantly "In the last week from 08 January 2022
               | to 14 January 2022, in an age-standardised population,
               | the COVID-19 related death rate in individuals that
               | received a booster or third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine
               | was between 3.2 to 9.4 times lower than individuals who
               | are unvaccinated or have only received one or two doses
               | of a COVID-19 vaccine.". That directly contradicts your
               | "fact",
               | 
               | It does? You pulled a quote that compares boosted vs
               | unvaccinated/one/two doses, and that is not the
               | comparison I was making. It's possible that I'm
               | misinterpreting the data, but you didn't show it right
               | there.
        
               | subsubzero wrote:
               | > That may be more driven by the mildness of Omicron than
               | it is by the protective effect of the vaccine
               | 
               | So with this one I wonder if the mildness of omicron is
               | due to previous infection/vaccination than the virus
               | itself being mild. Like if omicron came into the scene in
               | 2020 it would have been just as deadly but more
               | infectious. I don't know for certain if this is true but
               | was something I was thinking.
               | 
               | As for this I 100% agree:
               | 
               | > This is something that is in all likelihood not
               | variant-specific. In other words, cloth masks were always
               | ineffective, however with the increased transmissibility
               | of Omicron, this fact of ineffectiveness has become
               | readily apparent.
        
               | ciceryadam wrote:
               | From December 11 to January 7, 2022, 107 patients died in
               | Scotland who were vaccinated twice.
               | 
               | Most of them (more than 95 percent) received the second
               | dose more than six months before their deaths. As many as
               | 96 percent of them "had other health complications that
               | contributed to their deaths," the PHS report said. Their
               | average age was 78.1 years.
        
               | hammock wrote:
               | Yes, the vaccine effectiveness wanes quite significantly
               | at 6 months.
               | 
               | Most covid deaths, regardless of vaccination status, had
               | other health complications that contributed.
               | 
               | And the average age of covid deaths, regardless of
               | vaccination status, is over 70.
               | 
               | Was there a particular takeaway you were looking to
               | impart?
        
               | rovolo wrote:
               | The scots over 70 are 100% 2+ doses. There is no
               | unvaccinated comparison group in Scotland for people over
               | 70.
               | 
               | https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/phs.covid.19/viz/C
               | OVI...
        
               | rovolo wrote:
               | You're taking 14 vs 10 from table 15 on page 50 on the
               | report. Page 51 says:
               | 
               | > The rates in Table 15 should not be used as a measures
               | of vaccine effectiveness due to unaccounted for biases
               | and risk factors.
               | 
               | The age-standardized morality rates you mentioned are for
               | just the week of Jan 8-14 (though the same pattern is
               | visible for earlier weeks). But, you didn't mention
               | 3-dose stats with show the opposite pattern:
               | 
               | - Unvaccinated: 16/1.5m raw; 10/100k age adj
               | 
               | - 2-dose: 33/1m raw; 14/100k age adj
               | 
               | - 3-dose: 71/3m raw; 1.5/100k age adj
               | 
               | You can't infer the protectiveness of vaccination in
               | elders directly from this age-adjusted mortality data
               | because _Scotland has 100% 2+ dose coverage in those age
               | 60+_. The unvaccinated group only includes people under
               | 60 while the vaccinated group includes both. You _have_
               | to use other observations to judge the protective effect.
               | 
               | https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/phs.covid.19/viz/C
               | OVI...
               | 
               | (In reality the number is a bit under 100% because the
               | denominator and the numerator are not linked together.
               | They're tracking sum totals, not individual people.)
        
               | hammock wrote:
               | >you didn't mention 3-dose stats with show the opposite
               | pattern:
               | 
               | I didn't. Boosted do show more protection than
               | unvaccinated, at least for a period of time. I don't
               | dispute that.
        
               | Guidii wrote:
               | To put it more directly, the same document states (on
               | page 36):
               | 
               | In the last week from 08 January 2022 to 14 January 2022,
               | in an age-standardised population, the COVID-19 related
               | death rate in individuals that received a booster or
               | third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine was between 3.2 to 9.4
               | times lower than individuals who are unvaccinated or have
               | only received one or two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine
        
               | hammock wrote:
               | You pulled a quote that compares boosted vs
               | unvaccinated/one/two doses, and that is not the
               | comparison I was making. It's possible that I'm
               | misinterpreting the data, but you didn't show it right
               | there.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | hydrok9 wrote:
             | How about if you have anxiety issues and the reduced inflow
             | of air from masks gives you panic attacks? This has been my
             | life for this pandemic. I take medication but it does not
             | stop them 100% from happening, and I have to use anti-
             | anxiety techniques most times I put one on to stop from
             | being overwhelmed by anticipation. Does anyone care about
             | people like me? It sure feels like they don't. And I have
             | seen my physical and mental condition degrade largely due
             | to this (I was never personally panicked by the virus
             | itself). There are others like me and it is deeply
             | upsetting that we have to suffer like this.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | [ EDIT: other commenters response to this comment made me
               | go look up some original research on the topic. As a
               | result, I fully retract what I've said below. I found
               | several papers that report substantial restrictions of
               | airflow from wearing a correctly fitted N95 mask.
               | 
               | I was wrong, and I apologize for the misinformation. I
               | did try to explicitly say that I was not doubting
               | someone's experiences, but I apologize for appearing to
               | do that too. I've left the text up because that seems
               | more honest. ]
               | 
               | I do not want to seek to diminish your very real anxiety
               | and panic issues.
               | 
               | But you should be aware that there is no actual reduced
               | inflow of air due to mask wearing, certainly not one that
               | you would detect physiologically. In 2020, there were
               | numerous demonstrations of this, both with actual
               | measurements (lung volume, blood oxygen etc.) and with
               | more anecdotal illustrations such as vigorous exercise
               | even while wearing multiple masks.
               | 
               | Your mental conditions matter, and I hope you are able
               | find ways to live reasonably happily without too much
               | anxiety.
        
               | adamrezich wrote:
               | the retraction is appreciated but, if you'll excuse me
               | for saying so, the fact that you thought this at all
               | shows that we're well into "brainwashing" territory with
               | this mask nonsense.
               | 
               | it should be beyond obvious to any neutral observer that
               | putting a covering over one's nose and mouth will affect
               | their breathing airflow, _especially_ so when exercising.
               | you don 't even have to try it yourself to intuit this,
               | it's just common sense. but once you _have_ tried it,
               | there should be _zero_ doubt in your mind that your
               | breathing airflow is affected, especially if you 're
               | actually going out of your way to ensure that you've
               | sealed the mask on your face properly.
               | 
               | I don't say this to shame or disparage you specifically,
               | but instead to point out how people, broadly, are having
               | their thoughts programmed, on a massive scale, to truly
               | believe things that are _obviously_ contradictory to
               | reality.
               | 
               |  _this should be very concerning to everyone._
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | > the fact that you thought this at all shows that we're
               | well into "brainwashing" territory with this mask
               | nonsense.
               | 
               | I don't agree with that. As noted, blood oxygen levels
               | for most people are not changed by mask wearing
               | (presumably, most of us just add the extra 20-30% effort
               | to keep the airflow up and/or were nowhere near close to
               | requiring the full breath).
               | 
               | > once you have tried it, there should be zero doubt in
               | your mind that your breathing airflow is affected
               | 
               | As some comments in the main thread here have noted,
               | masks like the 3M Aura+ (which I've been wearing for a
               | few months now) really do not have much impact on
               | breathing airflow. My actual experience of wearing KN95's
               | and N95's even while running is that I do not _feel_ that
               | my airflow is impacted at all. My mistake was to combine
               | that actual personal experience together with data on
               | physiological state while wearing masks (not changed much
               | in most people) and make the false claim that there was
               | no impact on airflow.
               | 
               | Some of those comments noted that the construction and
               | fit of the mask can make a huge difference - damp cloth
               | masks, for example, do seem to have an outsize impact. I
               | have never used cloth masks during the pandemic, and I
               | live in an exceedingly dry climate, so people I know who
               | have worn them have not commented much on the effects of
               | them being damp.
               | 
               | So, no, I do not agree that what I said (even while
               | actually false) was "obviously contradictory to reality".
        
               | adamrezich wrote:
               | when you put a thing over your nose and mouth, it
               | negatively affects how well you can breathe. depending on
               | the material and how much you're currently breathing
               | (exerting yourself or not, healthy or not), it may be a
               | little, it may be a lot. this is basic common sense
               | intuition, and propaganda about the effectiveness and/or
               | necessity of masks of any description should not preclude
               | you from continuing to hold these basic observable truths
               | in your mind.
               | 
               | > presumably, most of us just add the extra 20-30% effort
               | to keep the airflow up and/or were nowhere near close to
               | requiring the full breath
               | 
               | how can this be considered negligible under any
               | circumstances? even if the observed difference in effort
               | required seems negligible for you personally, why would
               | it be the same for everyone? I can think of many, many
               | reasons why 20-30% additional effort _to breathe_ can be
               | extremely impactful for many different people with
               | different personal circumstances.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | Let's try an (thought) experiment:
               | 
               | Put a tennis racket in front of your face. Does it impede
               | airflow? I think the answer is clearly no.
               | 
               | Put a plastic bag over the your nose and mouth? Does it
               | impede airflow? I think the answer is clear yes.
               | 
               | Put a food sieve over your mouth and nose. Does it impede
               | airflow? I think the answer is probably no, but there's
               | room for doubt.
               | 
               | Clearly, something placed over your mouth and nose does
               | not necessarily impede airflow - it depends on the
               | properties of the material it is made of. Some materials
               | obviously have no impact, some have a lot, others are
               | inbetween.
               | 
               | So the question is: why you conclude without careful
               | measurement that a given mask would impede airflow?
               | Presumably you have some intuition about the material and
               | what you know about its properties ("It stops X percent
               | of all particles above a certain size!") that lead you to
               | conclude that it's somewhere between a food sieve and
               | plastic bag, rather than a tennis racket and a food
               | sieve. But there's no "common sense" here. How can
               | Goretex fabric allow water vapor to pass freely, but not
               | allow water in liquid phase to pass at all? You cannot
               | explain that using common sense, but again, you have some
               | intuition that you can use common sense to reason about
               | the properties of masks.
               | 
               | I should also stress that the 20-30% number comes from a
               | 2009 paper on the reduction in airflow. The increase in
               | breathing effort could be less than that, unchanged or
               | more than that, depending on a large number of factors.
               | Example: sitting on a sofa in a comfortable temperature
               | and being very relaxed ... you are already breathing
               | fairly shallowly, and the increase required to overcome
               | whatever effect the mask has will move you only to a
               | condition you are in very regularly anyway, and so will
               | likely be unnoticeable (there's also the "X percent of a
               | small number is a small number" aspect). By contrast, if
               | you are exercising near V02max levels and in excellent
               | cardiovascular condition, you are likely already
               | breathing almost as hard as you can, and so breathing
               | harder due to reduced airflow is likely to challenging to
               | impossible.
        
               | subsubzero wrote:
               | What are you talking about with masks not restricting
               | airflow, totally not correct and absolute misinformation.
               | Here is what happens when you wear a mask while
               | exercising hard:
               | 
               | https://ktvz.com/news/coronavirus/2021/04/26/summit-hs-
               | runne...
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | I do not want to seek to diminish your very real belief
               | that my issues are not real. But they are. My panic
               | attacks in public started when I had to wear masks. When
               | I am anxious or stressed, my breathing shallows. When
               | this happens and I am wearing a mask, i have even less
               | airflow coming in. I have tested this by simply lowering
               | my mask, and examining how much air enters my nasal
               | cavity. It is a huge difference. Or, I should say, it
               | makes a huge difference to my mental state, even if the
               | change in oxygen is relatively small.
               | 
               | My psychiatrist, therapist and gp all confirmed this.
               | Frankly, you should trust people with these actual
               | conditions. We are living it, you aren't.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | I tried to explicitly state that I believe that your
               | mental experiences are real and worthy of attention and
               | care.
               | 
               | > I should say, it makes a huge difference to my mental
               | state, even if the change in oxygen is relatively small.
               | 
               | This is the key point. The change in airflow and oxygen
               | is extremely small. None of that means your mental state
               | does not change when wearing a mask, but it is probably
               | useful to understand that this is not due to a
               | physiological process involving less oxygen/air.
               | 
               | [ EDIT: one possible answer is change in the CO2
               | conditions and/or thermal conditions: e.g.
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8450908/ ]
               | 
               | [ EDIT 2: I was wrong. Please see original comment + edit
               | at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30104420 ]
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | The key point is that you are wrong. It is absolutely due
               | to a physiological process. You are telling me that it is
               | "all in my head," and that it is impossible that a cloth
               | mask over my face restricts my airflow. I am telling you
               | it isn't.
               | 
               | >I tried to explicitly state that I believe that your
               | mental experiences are real and worthy of attention and
               | care.
               | 
               | I appreciate that. But you should be aware that people
               | with anxiety hear this all the time. "What you believe is
               | true matters. And is important. Now, having said that..."
               | it isn't helpful and not really all that respectful,
               | really. I can tell you with 100% certainty that
               | restricting my breathing gives me anxiety. Not the idea
               | of it, but the actual act itself. And that I feel less
               | air entering my body, and more anxiety, when I wear
               | masks. Other people have said the exact same thing
               | happens to them in this thread. It's your choice who to
               | believe.
               | 
               | Edit: saw your edit. Maybe it's not "oxygen," per se, and
               | another chemical is to blame. That would be helpful, if I
               | knew the exact mechanism! But unfortunately, not very
               | useful in solving the mask/anxiety issue. I've opted just
               | to get a shitty mask (in medical terms) that will suit
               | me, for my health needs.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | Please see my larger edit in my original comment at
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30104420
               | 
               | I was wrong.
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | Thank you for owning that and the edit.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | Thank you.
        
               | cpeterso wrote:
               | Have you tried using a plastic mask insert/bracket? I
               | find them very helpful. It lifts the mask off my mouth
               | and nose, so the mask doesn't feel as constricting and I
               | no longer suck in cloth when I'm breathing harder.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | I'll try it! Thanks
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | I wonder if the shallowed breathing is a physiological
               | response that only some of us experience while wearing
               | masks. It could explain why there are two very different
               | experiences for people when masked.
               | 
               | I fortunately don't experience panic attacks from wearing
               | a mask, but I will consistently get a headache from
               | wearing one. And it's the same-feeling kind of headache I
               | get from being in another enclosed space without air
               | circulation.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | It could be. To me it doesn't feel like there is a
               | difference in the cadence of my breathing, after I put
               | the mask on. I simply have less oxygen coming in. I
               | probably should be breathing more deeply, all the time!
               | Then perhaps the mask wouldn't make a noticeable
               | difference. But after a lifetime of dealing with anxiety,
               | I've learned to trust my body. My mind can lie to me when
               | im anxious, but my body generally doesn't.
        
               | Domenic_S wrote:
               | Not disagreeing with any of your comments about masks;
               | but FWIW, as another person with a diagnosed & medicated
               | anxiety disorder, your (our) body(ies) _absolutely do_
               | lie to us. It 's an inappropriate physiological response
               | (fight/flight/etc) to stimuli. The panic response _is the
               | lie_. It was that realization/training through therapy
               | that helped make my disorder manageable, knowing that
               | just because my body thinks it's in danger of dying
               | doesn't mean it actually is.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | >The panic response _is the lie_
               | 
               | You're right. I think I meant that examining my body's
               | responses can give me a quicker realization of "something
               | is wrong (meaning my anxiety is out-of-proportion)" than
               | examining my mental processes can; because I can get
               | trapped in that anxious loop of thinking about thinking,
               | and worrying about worrying. So it doesn't "lie" to me,
               | that way.
               | 
               | But the only way to truly get over anxiety is like you
               | say, you've got to realize that all of it is exaggerated
               | and false, and you've got to just "let it go." It really
               | does get easier. The pandemic has made it harder again
               | and I resent it.
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | Yeah, this matches my experience as well. The air simply
               | feels less.. airy. Like I can't get a deep enough breath.
               | I'd love to understand the science behind it.
        
               | boilerupnc wrote:
               | "Polypropylene is a commonly used material for N95 type
               | respirators. In order for small particles to get through
               | a filter composed of interlaced layers of polypropylene
               | fibers, they have to wind through a rather tortuous path
               | and as a result would likely be trapped in the material."
               | [0]
               | 
               | [0] https://qcmask.com/pages/the-science-of-masks
        
               | cartoonfoxes wrote:
               | >But you should be aware that there is no actual reduced
               | inflow of air due to mask wearing
               | 
               | Huh? From https://weintraubcenter.dentistry.ucla.edu/n95-
               | respirators-t...
               | 
               | >Pressure drop is a measure of the resistance that the
               | air meets as it flows through the respirator filter and
               | into the mask. This is important because the pressure
               | drop affects the comfort and breathability of the mask-
               | specifically a lower pressure drop is desirable as it
               | translates to increased breathability and thus comfort.
               | 
               | > On average, those that have high filtration efficiency
               | are also the ones with the largest pressure drop, which
               | make it difficult to breath.
               | 
               | I'm aware not everyone is wearing a N95 or better
               | respirator, but the metric applies to all masks.
        
               | amluto wrote:
               | There are some genuine N95 duckbill style masks that have
               | much lower pressure drop.
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | Genuine question- how is that actually possible?
               | 
               | Surely there is, at minimum, an unstated variable here
               | like "effort required to inhale the same volume of air"?
               | Or the composition of the air?
               | 
               | I'm not an expert in this area, but as someone who
               | "feels" like I'm getting less oxygen and is willing to
               | consider that my body is tricking me, help me understand.
               | 
               | edit: I shouldn't have to say this, but I'll mention I'm
               | vaccinated+boosted and have complied with the mask
               | mandates. I just don't understand these unintuitive
               | claims.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | There is no way that you are not having your intake of
               | air restricted by putting a piece of cloth or fabric over
               | your face. For the average person it probably doesn't
               | make a difference in the way their body or mind works.
               | But small changes can and do make a huge difference in
               | people who are not neurotypical, or have breathing issues
               | due to their sinuses.
        
               | mh- wrote:
               | That is my assertion as well. The simple physics of it
               | require that filtering air effectively will reduce the
               | air-for-effort. If you're not experiencing this, you're
               | pulling air from around the sides of your mask.
               | 
               | (Note that not noticing it is not the same as not
               | experiencing it.)
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | "no actual reduced inflow of air due to mask wearing,
               | certainly not one that you would detect physiologically."
               | 
               | Depends on how you measure it and what you mean by
               | physiologically detect. Generally, the resistance of
               | breathing through a ("good") mask is not automatically
               | detectable, but does exist and one could detect it if
               | they are attentive. Your body tends to increase tidal
               | volume and/or respiration rate because of the rebreathing
               | of the stale under the mask. There are certainly studies
               | that measure the physiological effects, such that we set
               | 15 minute and 8 hour limits on CO2 exposure etc.
               | 
               | Granted it's largely not an issue, but it's not
               | necessarily correct to say that it offers _no_
               | restriction and _no_ physiological changes.
        
               | jaywalk wrote:
               | Pure, unadulterated BS. I was in the hospital for a few
               | days last year (unrelated to Covid) and as part of the
               | standard discharge process, I had to walk around (with a
               | mask on) while my blood oxygen was measured. It was
               | slightly low, so the nurse said "take off your mask for a
               | second" and sure enough, it popped right back up to
               | normal. She said she sees it with almost everyone.
               | 
               | You're breathing in less air, and more CO2. There is no
               | way it's _not_ going to have an impact.
        
               | tintor wrote:
               | You must be joking! Have you tried exercising with
               | surgical mask or N95 respirator? I train regularly with
               | N95 since Omicron started and they definitely negatively
               | affect airflow and aerobic exercise performance. N95
               | respirator even more than surgical mask. I am used to
               | them and don't have anxiety, but they aren't comfortable
               | at all. They also affect temperature of air that you are
               | inhaling as it mixes inside the mask with the hot air
               | that you exhale, increasing your rest and cooldown time.
        
               | buzzert wrote:
               | Blood-oxygen level is not relevant when it comes to
               | mental well-being. I have the exact same problem as the
               | parent commenter. I've tried exercising with a mask
               | (cloth and surgical), and it feels like getting
               | waterboarded (because the mask inevitably becomes soaked
               | in sweat).
               | 
               | It causes a great amount of anxiety for me, and literally
               | feels like torture. I don't care about what lung
               | volume/blood oxygen "studies" say.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | Thank you
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | Jcampuzano2 wrote:
               | I am double vaxed+boosted, and I still wear a mask
               | everywhere I'm required to which includes still going to
               | the gym 3-4 times a week.
               | 
               | My gym has gone back and forth between masks being
               | required or not with the case count. I know I've read
               | everything about airflow being fine, and there being no
               | reduced oxygen intake, but having worked out with and
               | without a mask depending on location in the past 2 years
               | I can attest anecdotally as somebody with no health
               | problems that even if only anecdotal it is way more
               | taxing/difficult to recover breath when working out with
               | a mask on, and can be borderline anxiety/torture
               | especially after very intense sets or cardiovascular
               | effort.
               | 
               | It easily takes me at least a couple more minutes to
               | recover my breath/rest in between very hard sets of heavy
               | squats for instance as compared to when not wearing a
               | mask.
        
               | speg wrote:
               | As an aside, have you noticed any improvements from
               | training with a mask on? Is it like how runners might
               | train at high altitude, so when you come back to normal
               | levels you are more efficient?
        
               | hedgehog wrote:
               | A good while back I looked at restrictors for training
               | and my recollection is they didn't show any benefit in
               | studies. Unclear why. They're a lot tougher than any
               | respirator I've tried so I wouldn't expect the respirator
               | to have any benefit that direction. Altitude tents
               | apparently do work but are more trouble and risk than I'm
               | comfortable with.
        
               | Jcampuzano2 wrote:
               | The only thing I could say is I have improved some at
               | working out with a mask on, but it's still noticeable by
               | a large margin more difficult to recover my breath/energy
               | than without.
               | 
               | I don't think I've generally seen that transfer over to
               | performance without one though.
        
             | jasonlotito wrote:
             | > For two years we've been asked to park our problems and
             | to act like literally all that matters is the spread of
             | Covid.
             | 
             | The problem is only half the population really followed
             | through. These measures are still needed more because half
             | the population effectively thinks COVID is no big deal or a
             | hoax.
        
               | xigoi wrote:
               | Many of the restrictions were mandatory, so all people
               | had to follow through...
        
               | ajford wrote:
               | Yeah, just because it was mandatory doesn't mean people
               | followed through. I live in a very progressive city and
               | we still had many people refusing to follow mask mandates
               | at the height of pre-vaccine pandemic.
               | 
               | People ripping down mask signs, spitting on people,
               | arguing at the doors to a store, etc.
        
               | xigoi wrote:
               | Interesting, I haven't noticed any of that. Maybe my
               | country has a different mentality. I do see some people
               | not having the masks cover their nose, but definitely
               | nowhere near 50%, more like 5% at worst.
        
               | ajford wrote:
               | Totally get that. A friend of mine from Finland said
               | compliance with mandates and safety advisories was a lot
               | better back home than those in the US.
               | 
               | There's a lot of people in the US arguing that mask
               | mandates and other medical precautions are "violating
               | their freedom".
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | My parents live in a moderately rural area outside of
               | seattle, i live in seattle. The end of very first week of
               | the lockdown my parents were able to acquire or had
               | already had a few items I could not find in stores in the
               | city. Primarily toilet paper, but a few other items as
               | well.
               | 
               | So I drove over to their place and they leant me some
               | stuff, we were all paranoid so they left the stuff in the
               | garage, I drove up, waved to them on the porch and loaded
               | up my car and headed home. I did need to stop and get gas
               | before getting back on the freeway, at the gas station
               | there was a little mini-mart. There were four people
               | inside, none of them had a mask on. The gas station is
               | next to a Denny's or similar, their dining room was
               | closed but there were people waiting INSIDE and UNMASKED
               | for takeout.
               | 
               | That's why we can't have nice things, even if your
               | town/city collectively was pretty serious about lockdown,
               | the next town over might not be and their citizens are
               | coming into your community to work or whatever else. The
               | only enforcement is the local sherif and if they are a
               | crazy gimme liberty or gimme death type they aren't going
               | to enforce shit.
        
             | Mockapapella wrote:
             | Just to throw my anecdote into the ring -- I live in a mid
             | sized city in the midwest. People have largely stopped
             | wearing masks since about March of last year in all places
             | except for hospitals (and even then it's just those crappy
             | generic blue masks). My GF and I actually had a bit of
             | culture shock when we took a trip to Chicago a few weeks
             | ago and 95%+ people were wearing masks everywhere they
             | went, along with private businesses requiring masks and
             | proof of vaccination.
             | 
             | It's not like the people around here aren't aware of
             | COVID-19 and the subsequent variants, we just kind of moved
             | on.
        
             | standardUser wrote:
             | I have to assume you live on the West Coast. I have spent a
             | couple months in and around SF during pandemic, but I live
             | in NYC and have travelled to many other places.
             | 
             | The West Coast experience seems to be a singularly
             | restrictive experience. I'd hesitate to assume the entire
             | nation is experiencing things the same way as you describe
             | them (they are not). Though it does seem like many students
             | across the nation are getting the super-restrictive
             | experience as well.
        
               | dymk wrote:
               | It also depends where on the West Coast you live, of
               | course. It's more of a city/rural divide.
               | 
               | I live south of Seattle. Seattle is restrictive,
               | everybody outside is wearing masks, many restaurants are
               | still take-out only, business are open for limited hours.
               | 
               | But you go 40 minutes south to, say, Puyallup, and the
               | COVID restrictions are much more relaxed (if present at
               | all).
        
               | techsupporter wrote:
               | > Puyallup, and the COVID restrictions are much more
               | relaxed (if present at all).
               | 
               | Meanwhile, the medical group I work for in Seattle is
               | being absolutely swamped by patients being transferred
               | from overwhelmed hospital and urgent care facilities in
               | Pierce and Thurston counties. We've had to stop doing
               | anything but COVID-related care and the only reason we
               | have the capacity to do that is because we don't operate
               | an emergency room so we can't take on the worst-of-the-
               | worst cases.
               | 
               | According to our daily COVID update report, we have a
               | handful of patients who gave residence addresses--we ask
               | for this because the county and state departments of
               | health want it for statistics, among other reasons--
               | inside Seattle and just a few more inside King County.
               | 
               | It's a very stressful time for many of us, and it isn't
               | helped by the disparity in level of care, let's say, over
               | COVID prevention measures even inside the region.
        
               | dymk wrote:
               | I'd imagine this is also due, at least in part, to Pierce
               | County / South Sound having a lower vaccination rate than
               | the Seattle metro area.
        
               | techsupporter wrote:
               | I'm sure it is. In my experience, the willingness to be
               | vaccinated is directly, if loosely, correlated with the
               | willingness to do other COVID prevention measures, like
               | wearing any form of face covering properly (as in, over
               | the nose and mouth as opposed to a chin diaper) when in
               | an enclosed setting.
               | 
               | Because we are a not-for-profit medical group that
               | receives funding from the federal government, we are
               | covered by the vaccinate-or-test requirement from CMMS.
               | In my department, IT, we had two employees quit over it;
               | both of them live in Pierce County. Meanwhile, all of us
               | (so far as I know, obviously I am not privy to everyone's
               | medical records so I am going off of what is claimed and
               | who remains employed with us) who live inside Seattle
               | were fully vaccinated months before the requirement took
               | effect.
               | 
               | I'm also sorry if I come across as unsympathetic or
               | uncaring. Even though I "just work with the computers,"
               | this has not been easy for me or my department, and I
               | have seen nurses and doctors I have worked with for years
               | and become work friends with reach and then exceed
               | burnout and press on anyway out of a sense of duty and
               | obligation.
               | 
               | So it is just a bit disheartening to read yet another
               | thread on Hacker News where people keep insisting we'll
               | just have to live with it and this is just how things are
               | now and the West Coast is obviously bad because we've
               | tried to put this godforsaken virus first of mind for
               | stamping out. I know we're past being able to eradicate
               | it, but to just throw up our hands and say "well, even a
               | disposable mask with earloops is JUST TOO MUCH" makes me
               | deeply sad.
        
               | claytongulick wrote:
               | I'm sorry for the difficulty you and your coworkers are
               | facing, it can't be fun. I worked for six years in direct
               | patient care and I know what it's like when my ward is
               | filled an how exhausting it is.
               | 
               | Sometimes we lose a bit of the big picture in that
               | situation though. It helps to take a look at the actual
               | numbers.
               | 
               | In Pierce County, WA the hospitals have only recently
               | exceeded bed capacity warranting transfers [1], in the
               | past week there was an 8% excess capacity, the total bed
               | capacity of Pierce County is ~460, and last week there
               | were 125 covid admissions. The ICU is not at capacity,
               | it's at 92%, which is typically where ICU utilization
               | sits, if a hospital is profitable.
               | 
               | Pierce County has a new infection rate of about 3.5k per
               | 100,000 [2]. The population of Pierce County is almost 1
               | million, which gives about 35,000 total case infections
               | for 14 days. Of roughly 35,000 infections, there were 125
               | admissions over the past week. For excess capacity
               | transfer patients, the number is somewhere around 35 to
               | 40 people.
               | 
               | That's certainly enough to feel a strain with when you're
               | working there day to day, but from the average Pierce
               | County resident who's chance of admission in a given week
               | (not age or health adjusted) of 0.000125, I think it's
               | understandable why they may not feel like participating
               | in all of the restrictive measures.
               | 
               | https://datacentral.kitsapsun.com/covid-19-hospital-
               | capacity...
               | 
               | https://www.tpchd.org/healthy-
               | people/diseases/covid-19/pierc...
        
               | techsupporter wrote:
               | > but from the average Pierce County resident who's
               | chance of admission in a given week (not age or health
               | adjusted) of 0.000125, I think it's understandable why
               | they may not feel like participating in all of the
               | restrictive measures.
               | 
               | I know (and I don't mean that in a sarcastic way, I do
               | agree with you), and I get it. In our practice's case,
               | we're not taking transfers of patients who would be in
               | the ED/ER (we don't have those facilities), we're taking
               | patients who are in for the "long COVID" type symptoms or
               | who need other kinds of longer-term care. I think, though
               | I don't know for sure, that some hospitals in Pierce and
               | Thurston are asking outfits like ours to take patients
               | prior to the ICU getting full so those hospitals can
               | leave a spare bed or two for the true emergency cases.
               | 
               | I guess what I'm saying is it feels like so many of us on
               | the "invisible" end, from medical providers to service
               | workers to public health officials to warehouse folks to
               | all the rest, are expending so much effort to keep things
               | going that to hear people complain that their wellbeing
               | is impacted because they have to exercise behind a mask
               | six days a week just...falls flat. And I feel guilty even
               | typing that out because MENTAL HEALTH IS ABSOLUTELY
               | IMPORTANT and for some people that _does_ mean physical
               | exercise and yes anxiety CAN result from mask wearing.
               | But it seems like there are those who genuinely
               | experience those symptoms, and then there are those who
               | are hiding their petulant  "I don't wanna and you can't
               | make me nyah" behind claiming those symptoms. And the
               | overlap between the latter group and the group of people
               | who flatly refuse to be vaccinated so that we can all
               | dump these masks and rules is damn near a circle.
               | 
               | Anyway, I think we largely agree, and I'm just tired, but
               | not as tired as some.
        
             | edgyquant wrote:
             | Well put. I'm a 29 year old male who moved to a new city
             | right before covid and my life has basically been put on
             | hold for two years now with my only access to meeting
             | potential partners being Tinder (or bars, I suppose.) All
             | the activities I try to join (other than my BJJ classes)
             | are remote. Chess club is remote (might as well just play
             | chess.com) my bipolar support group is remote, etc.
        
               | standardUser wrote:
               | I am very curious, which city? I moved to NYC in early
               | pandemic and have had an extremely robust dating and
               | social life. Even in 2020 dating was not difficult here.
               | And for the past year or so life has been 95% normal,
               | with big events, shows, packed bars, etc.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | I have a feeling that if the same people were tasked with
           | setting road speed limits, they would set it to 20 mph and
           | argue that 30,000 lives will be saved each year. They aren't
           | wrong, but it's misjudging the risk most of us are willing to
           | accept for the benefits of being able to move around quickly.
        
             | throwaway22032 wrote:
             | Ah, that one's actually happening.
             | 
             | There are actual attempts to ban cars in my neighbourhood
             | now because some people judge that the marginal effects of
             | air pollution outweigh the enormous benefit of me being
             | able to visit my friends and family in literally a quarter
             | of the time.
             | 
             | These people don't think about benefit. It's only cost.
             | I've come to think of them as simply being depressed, in
             | the chemical imbalance sense.
        
               | jasonshaev wrote:
               | And here you are making pseudoscientific judgements
               | (chemical imbalance?!) about a huge number of people
               | you've lumped into a group and referred to as "these
               | people."
               | 
               | I'm seriously surprised you haven't been downvoted off
               | this thread.
        
             | cardanome wrote:
             | You are grossly misrepresenting the argument. It is about
             | 30mph inside cities. Which is a great idea, not just for
             | saving lives but for substantially increasing quality of
             | life of everyone living there.
             | 
             | The greatest cause of noise in cities is traffic. Setting a
             | strict speed limit would substantially reduce this. (Also
             | side benefits like better air quality and so on) And
             | traffic would actually flow better, so you might not even
             | reach your destination that much later.
             | 
             | You can be protect your individual freedom at all cost and
             | treat everything as a zero sum game or you can bee
             | cooperative and help build a better world for everyone by
             | compromising a bit.
        
           | eli_gottlieb wrote:
           | >There are circumstances in which "drop everything" makes
           | sense - if coronavirus were ten times more fatal, we'd do it
           | naturally.
           | 
           | It was pretty damn fatal when we had no containment measures
           | or vaccines. We're in a totally different situation now, and
           | need to get out of the "minimize cases" mentality.
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | When we had no containment measures or vaccines the CDC
             | estimated the infection fatality rate at about 0.6%.
        
           | mdavis6890 wrote:
           | I upvoted your comment for your overall sentiment about
           | focusing on what life is really about, and not driving to the
           | lowest-common-denominator of quality of life.
           | 
           | But I'd also like to downvote you for the this comment: "I
           | tend to think that people who operate in this way are
           | subhuman, in the genuine sense of the word" >> It's not
           | right, not useful, and not reflective. Much better is to
           | assume others are also smart, well-educated and well-
           | intentioned, and then try to genuinely understand why they
           | believe or act the way they do.
        
           | autoexec wrote:
           | > Like, yeah, I will take the risk of contracting coronavirus
           | to play the piano, because I want the piano in my life.
           | 
           | The problem comes when it's "I will take the risk of
           | infecting others who are vulnerable, of contributing to
           | overwhelming the already struggling healthcare system, and of
           | damaging the economy to play the piano, because it doesn't
           | matter how many people are infected or are dying every single
           | day I care more about myself getting the things I want right
           | now than I care about any of those things."
           | 
           | There's no need to frame the issue as if folks are being told
           | they can't do anything they enjoy ever again and have to
           | devote their whole lives to simply breathing and eating
           | either. It's a false dichotomy that we have to choose between
           | common sense measures for the good of our community and
           | limiting ourselves to "what is the minimum possible quality
           | of life we can have".
           | 
           | We can instead make smart choices based on the degree of
           | community spread which can mean putting off certain
           | activities, but often times just means putting on a mask and
           | washing our hands. It's not a huge ask.
        
           | lemmsjid wrote:
           | Perhaps instead I might be following Covid guidelines for the
           | following reasons: so I don't pass the infection onto those
           | who are indeed vulnerable; so I don't overtax an already
           | overtaxed healthcare system and healthcare workers. Part of
           | the ineffable human spirit, IMHO, is altruism: which in this
           | case can manifest as taking on a set of mild day to day
           | inconveniences in order to help others be happier and safer.
           | I do believe altruism is a (not exclusively) human
           | characteristic, which means that part of 'joie de vive',
           | alongside wine, piano playing, etc., is knowing one is doing
           | something for others.
           | 
           | Honestly, I don't think it's as extreme as "if coronavirus
           | were ten times more fatal" that would lead us to naturally
           | take on mitigations. Instead, it would be if the death rate
           | were evenly spread across age groups. Then, the motivation
           | for avoiding some piano playing would be the immediate cost
           | to self or close friends, rather than the abstract cost to
           | some other group.
           | 
           | All that said I am quite sympathetic to the motivation behind
           | your argument, but I believe you and GP are ignoring some
           | motivations people might have for following or being
           | 'bureaucratic automatons'.
        
             | tmnvix wrote:
             | > so I don't pass the infection onto those who are indeed
             | vulnerable; so I don't overtax an already overtaxed
             | healthcare system and healthcare workers
             | 
             | This seems reasonable and is a common point of view. It
             | does make me curious though. Did you get a yearly flu shot
             | prior to Covid? If not, has Covid changed your mind about
             | this?
        
             | Zanneth wrote:
             | At this point, the most vulnerable have a sophisticated
             | arsenal of tools to prevent themselves from being seriously
             | affected by the virus. Vaccines, antivirals, masks like N95
             | that work to protect the wearer, etc. In my opinion it is
             | no longer the duty of the non-vulnerable, especially
             | children, to carry the burden of the pandemic because of
             | the extremely negative consequences of these
             | countermeasures.
        
           | laserlight wrote:
           | > if coronavirus were ten times more fatal, we'd do it
           | naturally.
           | 
           | What if people didn't? What then? How would that be different
           | from today?
        
           | gglitch wrote:
           | > Like, yeah, I will take the risk of contracting coronavirus
           | to play the piano, because I want the piano in my life.
           | 
           | I'm sympathetic to your point (and I love to play piano), but
           | I can't help but ask, if we slightly reword your claim: would
           | you be willing to take responsibility for spreading
           | coronavirus to n other people so you can play the piano?
           | 
           | Edit, to be clear: I'm not talking about the piano, or
           | surface transmission; I'm talking about the values.
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | There is more to life than a singular focus on spreading
             | Covid. Life would be robbed of all that is worth living for
             | if every action and encounter we take has to pass the
             | "willing to spread Covid" question.
             | 
             | There are countless more problems and risks in life than
             | Covid. Many are much more important to individuals.
        
             | criddell wrote:
             | > would you be willing to take responsibility for spreading
             | coronavirus to n other people so you can play the piano?
             | 
             | Would you be willing to accept responsibility for the
             | increased depression and loneliness among the young people
             | who live together in this building that could result from
             | banning the piano?
        
               | gglitch wrote:
               | Yes, exactly. We have conflicting values to balance. I
               | hope most of us can do it most of the time from the goal,
               | however quixotic, of doing the most good for the most
               | people. I don't claim to know what that is, and I am not
               | saying that the kid in the example shouldn't be able to
               | play the piano (though, on that note, it seems to me that
               | if a student's well-being depends that directly on being
               | able to play the piano, the school itself is foundering).
               | But I get you. It would be all too easy to settle for
               | some sort of rhetorical first principle that abstracts
               | away all the complexity: sharing things makes people
               | sick, we shouldn't share things. Or, other people getting
               | sick is their own problem, damn the torpedos, I'm jamming
               | in the lounge.
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | > if a student's well-being depends that directly on
               | being able to play the piano
               | 
               | It's death by a thousand cuts. The piano policy isn't
               | _that_ devastating by itself, but it 's one of 50 things
               | that have been taken away.
        
               | gglitch wrote:
               | It's exhausting. And the piano policy in the example is
               | totally absurd. I hope my remarks didn't come across as
               | personal. I have kids in school too, and although I'm
               | currently favoring masks, I'm also miserable about how my
               | kids' early childhood social and academic development
               | have been impacted.
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Why do kids even need masks? Like, they aren't at risk...
               | this is a known fact since like March of 2020. Why force
               | kids to wear them? Who are they supposed to be
               | protecting? Fully vaccinated teachers? Who?
        
               | ajford wrote:
               | Kids are _less_ at risk. That doesn 't mean they _aren 't
               | at risk_. They can, and do, still catch Covid, even if
               | they are less likely to suffer severe hospitalization.
               | 
               | On top of that, if they end up with long-covid or some
               | other long-term complication from the Covid infection,
               | they're quality of life is impacted for a far longer
               | time. Some known long-covid complications include things
               | like (potentially) permanent loss of smell or taste,
               | reduced mental faculties, and organ damage. Would you
               | sentence a child to a lifetime of being unable to taste
               | their food for the rest of their lives just so they don't
               | have to wear a mask for a tiny portion of their lives?
               | 
               | Also, adults seem to hate masks, but plenty of kids don't
               | feel the same way. My oldest loves to accent his outfits
               | with his cloth masks, and wears them over surgical or N95
               | masks now.
               | 
               | Who are they protecting? They're protecting _each other_
               | and _everyone around them_. That could be a teacher who
               | could catch a breakthrough case, a sibling or family
               | member, and anyone they might come into close contact
               | with. That also cascades. That vaccinated teacher who may
               | have caught a break through case might infect their
               | family causing a small outbreak in their home.
               | 
               | By wearing a mask, they're reducing risk, even if it
               | might be a small amount. Those few percentage points
               | _could_ mean the difference between life and death for
               | someone in their contact circle.
        
             | jaywalk wrote:
             | How is him playing the piano spreading anything aside from
             | possibly joy and happiness? What a ridiculous thing to say.
        
               | gglitch wrote:
               | Yeah, sorry for not being more clear, but I wasn't
               | talking about that person, or the piano, or about the
               | odds of someone contracting COVID from surfaces. I was
               | using the quote to illustrate what I see as a difficult
               | pair of values to balance that situations like masks in
               | classrooms, or other shared-space restrictions, really
               | throw into painfully high relief: how do we collectively,
               | as a society, balance our own personal inclinations
               | (i.e., in this case, to play the piano, or in OP, to let
               | our kids go unmasked) with whatever risks we impose on
               | other people (i.e., in this case, which for the record I
               | totally agree is excessive, that the shared piano will
               | help spread disease; or in the outer case, that fewer
               | masks in the classroom could lead to, e.g., more sick
               | grandparents, or teachers)?
        
               | jaywalk wrote:
               | In the case of the piano, it's very simple: anyone who is
               | worried about catching Covid by listening to the piano is
               | free to not listen to the piano. There's really nothing
               | to balance.
        
               | gglitch wrote:
               | Solid, got it. Next time I talk to criddell's kids'
               | university's dorm administrators, I'll try to set them
               | straight. Hopefully they'll be able to zoom out a bit
               | from whatever conversation-impairing details they've
               | latched onto.
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | This myopic focus on exactly one specific illness to the
               | literal exclusion of everything else is not healthy.
               | People need to accept the risks and move on.
        
             | hammock wrote:
             | 48 million Americans get food poisoning every year, many
             | dying. Are you going to stop cooking for your family and
             | friends?
        
               | gglitch wrote:
               | Yeeeaaah, I realize my point was easy to make a
               | caricature of, but that's a pretty specious caricature.
               | I'm talking about an effort to balance safety and freedom
               | from a more collective and thoughtful perspective.
        
           | mcguire wrote:
           | You would take that risk, everyone you know will take that
           | risk, everyone _they_ know will take that risk....
        
           | ajford wrote:
           | To me, this ignores the fact that a death of a loved/cared
           | for individual is the most "minimum quality of life" you can
           | get.
           | 
           | Sure, being able to go watch a family movie together used to
           | be a big family thing, but we can't do that anymore. Our QOL
           | has dropped in that regard, but it's far less impactful than
           | saying to heck with it and going to the theater and having my
           | kid or an in-law catch Covid and die. Long Covid even
           | indicates there's a chance that surviving Covid leaves you
           | with a long-term impact to QOL. Why take that risk over minor
           | irritation in the near term?
           | 
           | Sure, masks are tedious and annoying. But to my youngest, so
           | are shirts and shoes. If he had his choice, he'd run around
           | all damn day in underwear or shorts. But society as a whole
           | benefits from a general adherence to everyone wearing shirts
           | and shoes in public. He's got the same feelings towards
           | seatbelts. Just like masks, seatbelts are only a half-
           | measure. They don't prevent you from dying in a car crash,
           | but they give some modicum of benefit overall. There's a
           | higher chance of surviving a crash with a seatbelt on, even
           | if it's not guaranteed.
           | 
           | All of these "I'm done with masks/precautions" statements are
           | made in a void while ignoring the ripple effect that stems
           | from that.
           | 
           | There's a turning point where life will have to resume one
           | way or another, but the longer we can go as a civilization
           | with a reduced QOL the better the chances of resolving the
           | pandemic with fewer deaths all around.
        
             | AllegedAlec wrote:
             | > To me, this ignores the fact that a death of a
             | loved/cared for individual is the most "minimum quality of
             | life" you can get.
             | 
             | Counterpoint: my grandmother spent her last two years in
             | perpetual loneliness because of covid measures in care
             | homes preventing our family from ensuring full time
             | visitors.
        
           | jasonshaev wrote:
           | Referring to other humans as "subhuman" is disrespectful, at
           | best. Where do you get off saying ANYONE isn't a "living
           | being[s] with spirits and hopes and dreams?"
           | 
           | Having different priorities than you do does not make someone
           | "subhuman" and I would seriously reconsider the language you
           | are using.
        
         | stewbrew wrote:
         | When people play music, they sing. Singing in a crowded room
         | isn't really a good idea when there is an infectious visus
         | around.
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | The virus will always be around. Are you proposing a
           | permanent ban on singing?
        
             | stewbrew wrote:
             | I'm not proposing anything. I was just trying to give a
             | possible rational for this rule.
        
           | spookthesunset wrote:
           | This argument falls flat on its face. There is always
           | infections viruses going around. Covid is not the first nor
           | will it be the last.
           | 
           | Who gets to decide what is okay and isn't anyway? Some myopic
           | "experts" who barely feel the negative impacts of their
           | prognostications? What about other types of experts? What
           | would "music experts" say about shutting down the piano?
           | 
           | Covid doesn't live in a vaccum.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | It likely wouldn't be crowded. They have pretty strict rules
           | about the number of people that can gather in any room. Also,
           | these people all live together. They are touching the same
           | surfaces, breathing the same air, sharing the same bathrooms,
           | etc...
           | 
           | But you are right - singing would increase the risk of
           | infection. Still, I think the risks from the current version
           | of the virus to a vaccinated group of young people (who are
           | still required to wear masks!) is small enough that the piano
           | should be available.
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | Why is it up to anybody to decide what risks people are
             | able to take? We have freely available vaccines. Let people
             | decide for themselves...
             | 
             | There is more to life than Covid.
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | Presumably the piano ban was brought in last year, when people
         | though that Covid spreading through surfaces was a big problem
         | - and that piano ban hasn't been re-considered now that we know
         | that Covid is mostly spread through inhaling shared air.
        
         | speedgeek wrote:
         | I strongly suspect that playing the piano is banned due to the
         | possibility of social gatherings of people in close proximity
         | to each other listening to the piano - not contracting covid
         | from the piano itself.
        
         | rightbyte wrote:
         | The piano thing feels like a "we gotta do something" from a
         | board with very little power over things that would limit
         | transmission. Maybe they have a separate dorm board.
         | 
         | It is like where I live, the library closed becouse that was
         | the only thing the county could close.
         | 
         | And there is like never more than 10 people there at the same
         | time for a huge building. They could just have closed the
         | cafeteria and remove the reading chairs. Etc.
        
       | xdennis wrote:
       | > In the panicked spring of 2020, as health officials scrambled
       | to keep communities safe, they recommended various restrictions
       | and interventions, sometimes in the absence of rigorous science
       | supporting them. That was understandable at the time.
       | 
       | The fact that they were enacted with such zeal in the absence of
       | rigorous science _is_ why some /many people don't want them
       | removed now. What was instituted without science cannot be
       | removed by science.
       | 
       | If anything, the same emotional manipulation must be used. They
       | used to say "we have to lock up if only to save one life". Now it
       | should be "we need to go back to normal if only to save one child
       | from killing himself from isolation".
        
       | InsomniacL wrote:
       | sometimes I like to read the first paragraph of articles with the
       | opposite bias they impose.
       | 
       | > In the panicked spring of 2020, as health officials scrambled
       | to keep communities safe, they recommended various restrictions
       | and interventions, sometimes in the absence of rigorous science
       | supporting them. That was understandable at the time.
       | 
       | becomes:
       | 
       | >In the spring of 2020, as more health professionals than ever
       | before worked together on a single issue, they recommended
       | measures and interventions, based on our most up-to-date
       | understanding of medicine and science. That was remarkable at the
       | time....
        
       | ngngngng wrote:
       | Funny to watch the Atlantic change directions on COVID over the
       | last few months. I go back and forth on masks. In general I find
       | them to be a minor inconvenience, although I believe they're more
       | inconvenient for me than most because I'm blind and no matter
       | what I do they always fog up my glasses.
       | 
       | But while masks themselves are mildly inconvenient, harsh mask
       | mandates and restrictions become much more of an annoyance
       | quickly. Try taking a 6 hour flight with a 2 year old that's
       | required to keep his mask on the entire flight, and when he takes
       | it off (because he's 2, of course he's going to take it off) the
       | flight attendants threaten to turn the plane around and ban you
       | permanently. That gets old quick.
       | 
       | I was in a coffee shop the other day and my mask broke. Everyone
       | takes their mask off to sip their drink or eat their pastries,
       | but I was immediately asked to leave when the functional mask I
       | walked in with broke. They didn't have any extras, I wasn't
       | carrying around more than one mask. It was embarrassing. It's
       | pretty easy to grow tired of these mandates when your situation
       | deviates slightly from the norm.
       | 
       | At this point, I'm in favor of a "protect yourself" direction. If
       | you're concerned, put on an N95 and a face shield and sanitize
       | your hands often. It's clear that shutting down society to the
       | point necessary to restrict the spread of COVID is not feasible,
       | and all the halfway measures we've taken haven't achieved their
       | stated goals. It's just a nuisance at this point.
        
         | champagnois wrote:
         | Never mind the fact that they are not rated to filter viruses.
        
           | elsonrodriguez wrote:
           | Many of the test aerosols they use to test N95s and similar
           | are smaller than the coronavirus. Also they have done virus
           | measurements from sick people through masks that prove there
           | is filtration happening.
        
             | champagnois wrote:
             | N95s work via an electric polarity of the filter. This
             | charge is what captures the viruses. Filtration fades when
             | the charge is lost.
             | 
             | I don't need to see your studies because I have helped
             | build and certify N95 factories and know a lot about it.
             | The masks arent usable for long and arent reusable, either.
             | 
             | Cloth masks do nothing and are not a consideration to any
             | serious adult.
        
               | elsonrodriguez wrote:
               | Why make the claim that n95s don't filter viruses and
               | then say that they do indeed capture viruses?
               | 
               | Also yes the filtration fades but there's data out there
               | showing 40 hours of use on KF94s still showing filtration
               | percentages in the low 90s.
        
               | champagnois wrote:
               | You misunderstood or I was not clear. N95s do filter
               | viruses when used properly and still within their rated
               | window of use.
        
               | AlexandrB wrote:
               | > N95s work via an electric polarity of the filter
               | 
               | ...as well as mechanical filtration[1].
               | 
               | > To minimize the effect of electrostatic attraction, we
               | used isopropanol (IPA) to remove nearly all dipole
               | charges in the filter layer (Figure Figure77C) and
               | measured the filtration efficiency. The filtration
               | efficiencies of N95 respirators after IPA treatment
               | decreased about 7-15% after removing all dipole charges.
               | Such decreases in filtration efficiencies indicated that
               | electrostatic charges contributed to the filtration
               | performance.
               | 
               | Others here have pointed to studies RE the efficacy of
               | cloth masks. Which, while not great, is not 0 either. I'm
               | willing to be wrong, but do you have any research showing
               | that "Cloth masks do nothing"?
               | 
               | [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC772
               | 4761/
        
           | phailhaus wrote:
           | Surgical masks reduce COVID-19 spread, large-scale study
           | shows
           | 
           | https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-
           | mask...
           | 
           | Even cloth masks reduced transmission, and "reduce the
           | overall likelihood of experiencing symptoms of respiratory
           | illness during the study period."
        
           | autoexec wrote:
           | It doesn't matter. Putting literally anything in front of
           | your virus spewing face hole is going to help to some degree.
           | It's not as if the crook of our arms are rated to filter
           | viruses, but that hasn't stopped health organizations all
           | over the world from recommending the vampire cough for years.
           | 
           | It's true that a mask alone isn't enough to guarantee
           | anyone's safety and while community spread is high sending
           | kids into schools is pretty much asking for them to get
           | infected, but wearing masks is still far better than doing
           | nothing, it's just that sadly "nothing" is all some people
           | are willing to do to prevent the spread of the virus.
        
             | champagnois wrote:
             | Interventions work differently for different diseases.
             | Influenza is significantly hampered by social distancing,
             | surgical masks, and elbow coughs.
             | 
             | Covid 19 is a different virus and the interventions of a
             | flu pandemic are not going to yield the same results.
             | 
             | Infection is a binary status. You are either infected or
             | not. There is no such thing as half infected or slightly
             | infected. The probability of infection goes up when the air
             | is more and more saturated with airborne virus... When air
             | in a poorly ventilated space is fully saturated with virus,
             | it simply does not matter if you wear a surgical mask or
             | not as these interventions are doing nothing of
             | significance for you in that situation.
        
             | vikingerik wrote:
             | Your face hole is not virus spewing if you aren't sick.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | Too bad you can't know if you're sick or not until it's
               | too late. It's one of the reasons this virus spreads so
               | quickly. Even if you're not sick wearing masks also helps
               | to protect you from getting sick. It's win/win for
               | extremely minimal effort/inconvenience.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | vanviegen wrote:
               | Extremely minimal?
               | 
               | Masks make it a lot harder to communicate effectively.
               | People are harder to understand, emotions are harder to
               | read, speaking takes more effort.
               | 
               | If communicating is the main thing you do all day,
               | because you're a teacher for instance, that is a
               | _significant_ inconvenience.
        
               | ccn0p wrote:
               | not to mention facial expressions transmit an incredible
               | amount of non-verbal information that transcends language
               | itself (which the article touches upon). not taking this,
               | and all the other variables that we now have a better
               | understanding of, into account is highly negligent.
        
               | michaelmrose wrote:
               | Personally I found that a good n95 mask aside from being
               | more effective is far less muffling than a shitty cloth
               | mask.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | > Extremely minimal?
               | 
               | compared to hospitals being overrun, people getting
               | seriously ill and dying (2,200+ US deaths every day)
               | continuing economic harm and disruptions in education
               | yeah it's pretty small thing that it's a little harder to
               | communicate because your voice is muffled and you cant
               | watch people's lips form words.
        
               | vikingerik wrote:
               | Too bad that condemning everyone as sick with zero
               | evidence isn't how a free society works. Let's imprison
               | everyone who "might" commit a crime.
               | 
               | Masks have gigantic effort/inconvenience and mental
               | health costs. I can't think of anything but counting down
               | the seconds until ripping that f*cking thing off my face
               | while being strangled by that shit. Yet nobody cares
               | about anyone else's mental health over their own
               | perceived safety.
        
               | otikik wrote:
               | > condemning everyone as sick with zero evidence isn't
               | how a free society works.
               | 
               | That is like saying that seatbelts and speed limits
               | condemn you as a bad driver.
               | 
               | A free society protects everyone's rights. What people
               | tend to forget is that every right has a price, in the
               | form of an obligation. For example: You have the right to
               | private property, and the price is that you must respect
               | other's private property.
               | 
               | One of the things that is difficult to get about Covid is
               | that you can simultaneously be infectious (able to
               | transmit it to others) and asymptomatic (no headhache, no
               | fever, not even sore throat). That is not something we
               | are used to deal with, our other infectious illnesses
               | aren't that stealthy. There are other things that are
               | atypical about this virus (the kind of vaccine we used is
               | new, the amount of infected is unusually high, it
               | transmits via air...). Treating this illness with the
               | knowledge and techniques that we have learned from other
               | illnesses is simply not enough, there are too many
               | differences.
               | 
               | The free society is protecting your rights. In
               | particular, your right to not be infected by another
               | person might have no other chance but to get into close
               | contact with. The price of that right is that both of you
               | wear a mask.
               | 
               | Even if the mask is terribly uncomfortable for you, _you
               | must endure it because other people also have rights_.
               | The same way that just because you are hot, you are not
               | allowed to take off all your clothes in front of
               | everyone.
               | 
               | > being strangled
               | 
               | You might just need a better mask.
               | 
               | My head is big compared to the heads in China. Most of
               | the masks I have access to locally for cheap are made
               | there. They tend to be quite uncomfortable for me.
               | 
               | I splurged ~60 bucks into buying several from different
               | makers and found a model that works for me (Adidas Made
               | For Sport, I wear it at the gym and do cardio with it.
               | Comfortable and makes you look like Bane). When I'm going
               | to use the public transport or visit a hospital I wear an
               | FP2 mask with an ear protector. It is not comfortable,
               | but at least my ears don't hurt a the end.
               | 
               | You could also try inventing a better mask.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | There is no legal _right_ to be protected from infection.
               | It appears nowhere in the US Constitution.
               | 
               | The virus will be around forever and everyone will be
               | exposed. You can't seriously expect people to spend the
               | rest of their lives wearing masks.
               | 
               | https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/vinay-prasad/94646
        
               | michaelmrose wrote:
               | If you experience a great deal of anxiety or feel like
               | you are being strangled while wearing a mask you are
               | either wearing it wrong or have a medical issue this
               | isn't how most people experience wearing a mask.
               | 
               | This is what I wear. https://m.media-
               | amazon.com/images/I/511sZBCeHES._AC_.jpg I have bad
               | asthma. My lungs are basically shit. I can't jog a 1/4
               | mile without having breathing problems. I have no
               | problems wearing this mask save for doing sustained
               | physical activity.
        
               | rmah wrote:
               | Lol, if you think "Masks have gigantic
               | effort/inconvenience and mental health costs", your life
               | must be a continuous living hellscape.
        
               | vikingerik wrote:
               | It has been for the past two years, yes. Thank you so
               | much for your concern.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | wait until you find out about the mental health costs of
               | not being able to get healthcare when you need it because
               | of staff shortages or constant interruptions in
               | education, or the effects of long covid or the loss of a
               | loved one. I'll take masks over more of those kinds of
               | problems anytime.
        
             | elzbardico wrote:
             | humm... no.
             | 
             | Things don't work like that. On the contrary, exhaling
             | through what is essentially is a sieve is only going to
             | promote aerosolization.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | Exhaling through a sieve still blocks the largest wettest
               | particles, and limits the distance virus is forcefully
               | expelled through the air. Again, it's not perfect, but
               | infection is purely a numbers game. The more virus you
               | can deposit on a mask, or a sleeve, or even a sieve, the
               | less virus is in the air and the longer it takes for a
               | virus to go from a mouth on one side of a room to a
               | receptor on the other side of a room the better.
        
             | adolph wrote:
             | > not as if the crook of our arms are rated to filter
             | viruses
             | 
             | People don't shake elbows (unless they have a really
             | intimate elbow bump).
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | Masks also keep our hands cleaner and we don't usually
               | lick each other's masks either. Masks aren't perfect, but
               | they work.
        
         | sgt wrote:
         | I was never really a good mask wearer. Ideally I keep a
         | distance but at this point of the pandemic I've just started
         | taking the mask off or leaving it at home. There is a mask
         | mandate where I live if you go to the store and so on, but I
         | haven't had any complaints yet. I'm just drawing a line in the
         | sand at this point.
        
         | AlexandrB wrote:
         | > In general I find them to be a minor inconvenience, although
         | I believe they're more inconvenient for me than most because
         | I'm blind and no matter what I do they always fog up my
         | glasses.
         | 
         | I have this problem too with every surgical-style mask.
         | However, at least _some_ N95 masks fit me well enough that air
         | doesn 't escape around my nose and my glasses stay fog-free.
        
         | dahfizz wrote:
         | This is the kind of thing that just drives me crazy.
         | 
         | If the mandates were at the very least logically consistent, I
         | would not consider them a burden. "You are not allowed into the
         | restaurant unless you are masked, but you may immediately take
         | it off once you've walked 10 feet to your table" is nonsense.
         | Forcing you to leave the coffee shop with everyone unmasking to
         | drink anyway is nonsense.
         | 
         | It is security theater. It is virtue signalling. And if you
         | have the audacity to question the irrational rules, people
         | unironically call you a murderer.
        
           | sjg007 wrote:
           | You walk by others while you are not at your table. What do
           | you want to do? Hold your breath? Not to mention bathrooms
           | and so forth. Presumably the tables are well spaced etc...
        
             | pcmoney wrote:
             | In an open air room, the difference between walking past
             | and sitting in the same room as is negligible.
             | 
             | Total theatre, does nothing besides allowing restaurants
             | and patrons to feel ok/that they are "doing something" and
             | stay open.
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | Which is why indoor dining rooms should still be closed.
               | Pretending we aren't living through a pandemic that is
               | respiratory in nature is fucking madness. Maybe if we had
               | locked down harder for longer and treated this thing
               | seriously in the beginning we wouldn't be almost two
               | years into this with no end in sight.
        
               | ericd wrote:
               | People over here in France are generally living pretty
               | normally. Far from madness, it's pretty nice. Sure,
               | everyone masks up and whips out their phone for constant
               | QR scanning, but restaurants are still pretty full, trams
               | busses and trains as well, and people are getting
               | together. Schools are in person. It probably helps that
               | home tests are cheap ($25 for 5) and super easy to get.
               | 
               | It's frankly pretty weird that these comment threads are
               | always so ragey and judgey, let alone the ones on
               | Twitter. Everyone should chill a bit and stop reading the
               | news stories stoking fears - at some point the mental
               | effects are riskier than the physical ones, and I'd say
               | that many in this thread are well past this point.
        
               | Closi wrote:
               | > Which is why indoor dining rooms should still be
               | closed. Pretending we aren't living through a pandemic
               | that is respiratory in nature is fucking madness. Maybe
               | if we had locked down harder for longer and treated this
               | thing seriously in the beginning we wouldn't be almost
               | two years into this with no end in sight.
               | 
               | We aren't living through a pandemic anymore, we are now
               | living in an endemic. Omicron isn't going away anytime
               | soon - and we can't lock down businesses forever. Omicron
               | can't be stopped by lockdown anyway (see challenges of
               | containing it within China).
               | 
               | Secondly, it is highly unlikely that we would have got
               | rid of Covid-19 even harsher lockdown measures earlier
               | (e.g. see Omicron which happened because the original
               | virus jumped to mice and back to humans - just humans
               | locking down wouldn't have stopped this variant, we would
               | have had to lock down all the rodents too).
               | 
               | My personal view - we have to stop viewing life as
               | nothing but a vector for disease, and stop re-
               | architecting our entire society and culture to avoid
               | Covid infections (at huge societal costs to education,
               | standards of living etc).
        
               | sjg007 wrote:
               | You need to look up the definitions of pandemic, epidemic
               | and endemic.
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | An endemic disease is a disease that is always present in
               | a particular population/region.
               | 
               | Ex. Flu, malaria, HIV, syphilis, and... COVID
               | 
               | Am I missing something?
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | No, Covid is low risk if you are vaccinated and
               | elderly/at risk and extremely low risk if you are younger
               | (vaccinated or not)
               | 
               | It's endemic. Its not going away. We are all going to get
               | it. (Me: triple vaxxed, had covid 2x)
               | 
               | Getting vaccinated is a personal heath decision (which I
               | encourage)
               | 
               | Time to move on.
        
               | a_shovel wrote:
               | This plan would kill a large portion of immunocompromised
               | people worldwide.
        
               | Closi wrote:
               | Why are the only deaths we seem to care about those that
               | are Covid related?
               | 
               | If we are worried about killing people worldwide, far
               | more people die of hunger-related causes each day, but we
               | aren't rebuilding our entire society to save those
               | people. But I can't see a reason why deaths from Covid
               | are more of a tragedy than those we left to starve.
               | 
               | Or take smoking for instance - more people die each year
               | from smoking than have died from Covid, but we seem more
               | willing to ban human contact than to ban cigarettes?
               | Seems backwards to me (especially considering c10% of
               | smoking related deaths are from secondhand smoke in the
               | USA!).
               | 
               | I know these might seem like a silly point, but why are
               | we so focused on one single cause of death right now? We
               | lock down our entire society to 'protect unvaccinated
               | people worldwide', but then have continually cut foreign
               | aid?
               | 
               | IMO - I think we have totally lost the plot and lost
               | sight of what is important, but that's just my view.
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | How?
               | 
               | They can take whatever measures they need to keep
               | themselves safe. I assume they are not going into
               | restaurants now since the mask situation is just theater.
               | 
               | Their unfortunate circumstances don't mean they get to
               | control others. If there was a concrete ask with end date
               | that would be one thing but asking everyone else to live
               | as if they are immunocompromised just because they are is
               | not sustainable.
        
               | gherkinnn wrote:
               | No. At some point you've got to ask if these measures are
               | worth living for. It's winter in the northern hemisphere.
               | It'd dark and it's cold.
               | 
               | Keeping people locked up at home for a third season is
               | absurd.
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | I live in seattle. It's dark and cold. Hell the mask
               | helps, it's great for keeping my face warm.
               | 
               | I don't consider myself locked up. I miss in person game
               | nights the most, i miss dinner with friends (in a private
               | home or restaurant) somewhat.
               | 
               | We do gamenights online using videochat and products like
               | roll20 and boardgame arena. It's not super awesome but it
               | works for us for now.
               | 
               | I leave the house, go on walks go shopping etc. But I
               | take very reasonable precautions. I shop during low
               | traffic times, get up early and hit the grocery store
               | before work, I order food for pickup and wait outside for
               | it. During the more temperate months we'd set up a few
               | tables in the backyard and have friends over for meals,
               | each 'pod' got their own table nicely distanced, we were
               | probably a little louder than most dinner parties but it
               | was nice just to have them around.
               | 
               | For a friends birthday we wanted to go see spiderman, we
               | rented a theater (it was actually not especially
               | expensive) invited about 20 people who we knew were
               | supervaxxed and responsible enough not to come if they
               | though they might be exposed and had a grand, masked and
               | distanced, time.
               | 
               | I'm just trying to be responsible, I know several people
               | that are immunocompromised and they can't even do half
               | that stuff. I'm trying to be responsible so that they
               | can. When some asshole declares that 'covid is over' I
               | just realize how fucking narcissistic they are.
        
               | pcmoney wrote:
               | You and your friends are well off and it looks like you
               | dont have children and can work remote. Thats great!
               | 
               | Unfortunately most are living under wildly different and
               | much more difficult circumstances that they are being
               | asked to bear month after month with no end and with
               | dubious effect.
        
         | downrightmike wrote:
         | bandaid over the nose and mask should stop your fogging. You
         | can also use a little saliva on the lenses like they do in
         | scuba diving. I usually just move the glasses a little further
         | down my nose and that does like 95% of the solution.
        
           | otikik wrote:
           | Soap (dry, no water) rubbed and spread with a paper towel
           | until "apparently clean" also works - the thin layer of soap
           | prevents fogging. You might have to try several brands of
           | soap.
        
             | sleepybrett wrote:
             | I have some old ski goggle 'defogger' that's worked well
             | for me. I assume it operates on the same principal. It's
             | kind of a waxy stick that you rub on and spread out with a
             | cloth.
        
           | dygd wrote:
           | Something else that works really well is the anti fog dry
           | cloth/wipes. They're cheap and get rid of fogging completely.
        
           | ngngngng wrote:
           | I haven't tried saliva. Usually I just end up with my mask
           | way up my nose and my glasses moved down my nose. That works
           | fine short term but I have to hold my head like a pompous
           | asshole and that's tiring.
        
             | jmkb wrote:
             | The 3M "Aura" N95s have a generous and durable nose pad
             | that's basically eliminated this problem for me. They do
             | get extremely humid on the inside though; I have to carry
             | two and swap them every hour.
        
           | autoexec wrote:
           | early in the pandemic I had a very limited supply of N95
           | masks and when the nose wire got too deformed to keep a good
           | seal I solved it with a tiny amount of spirit gum. Lots of
           | solutions if you're willing to try.
        
         | CamperBob2 wrote:
         | _and all the halfway measures we 've taken haven't achieved
         | their stated goals._
         | 
         | You have some good points up until this one. Go to your local
         | hospital and ask them how they'd like it if their case load
         | went up by 2x due to a lack of "halfway measures." In some
         | places, that will be OK, while in others, it will be utterly
         | catastrophic.
         | 
         | Obviously that doesn't justify ridiculous overreactions to
         | unmasked toddlers, as you point out. But it's just as obvious
         | that the inadequate measures being taken are nevertheless
         | helpful on a population-wide basis.
        
           | ngngngng wrote:
           | > In some places, that will be OK, while in others, it will
           | be utterly catastrophic.
           | 
           | Maybe? But I already live in a place that did away with all
           | COVID restrictions some time ago (not to mention they were
           | never as harsh as elsewhere to begin with), and the situation
           | here is barely worse than places with prohibitive
           | restrictions.
        
             | throwawaygh wrote:
             | _> and the situation here is barely worse than places with
             | prohibitive restrictions._
             | 
             | Are you sure about this?
             | 
             | I lived in a metro area in the middle of anti-COVID
             | restriction land for a portion of the pandemic. Our
             | hospitals were _slammed_ during every surge, mostly with
             | COVID cases from outlying counties.
             | 
             | Tiny rural hospitals didn't have case spikes, but really
             | only because they functioned purely as funnels to the metro
             | hospital systems. In one case, a county never had more than
             | a single digit number of ICU admissions! Of course, the
             | dashboard failed to mention that the sole hospital in that
             | county only had a single digit number of ICU beds... guess
             | where their overflow patients ended up?
             | 
             | At least in our case, if you looked at statistics on
             | dashboards you got one story, but if you paid attention to
             | the actual source of cases -- as opposed to which ICU the
             | patient was sent to -- you got a very different story.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | champagnois wrote:
           | There is no evidence that I am aware of which would indicate
           | places with strict mandates (Boston or LA) did significantly
           | better or worse than places that made such mandates illegal
           | (Texas).
           | 
           | The outbreak curves and percentages are basically the same,
           | especially when you account for the population differences in
           | age, obeasity, diabetes, etc.
           | 
           | A red state might do worse at times, but is also more easily
           | explained as a result of a more vulnerable population.
           | 
           | Be scientific about it rather than political. There are a lot
           | of ways to analyze the data.
        
             | kareemm wrote:
             | > The outbreak curves and percentages are basically the
             | same, especially when you account for the population
             | differences in age, obeasity, diabetes, etc.
             | 
             | Can you cite a source for this claim?
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | You can start here for age adjusted death rates by US
               | state.
               | 
               | https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-
               | age-...
        
             | another_story wrote:
             | Try looking at places in the world where people actually
             | followed the mandates versus places that didn't. How come
             | Taiwan, which has cases of Omicrom right now, is not seeing
             | exponential spread?
        
           | dahfizz wrote:
           | > Go to your local hospital and ask them how they'd like it
           | if their case load went up by 2x due to a lack of "halfway
           | measures."
           | 
           | I love this argument.
           | 
           | "Just _imagine_ how much worse things could have been! The
           | observed outcome is better than a worst case scenario I made
           | up! "
           | 
           | "Just imagine if I didn't wear my lucky socks to the game. We
           | would have lost even worse!"
           | 
           | The data does not bear out your position. Places with less /
           | no mandates did not have measurably worse outcomes.
        
           | claytongulick wrote:
           | According to the article, in the only large randomized
           | studies that have been performed, masking showed little, if
           | any benefit.
           | 
           | As far as I'm aware, most studies, including WHO, show that
           | lockdowns were counter productive, and could result in
           | increased transmission.
           | 
           | I haven't seen a single study that showed school closures
           | resulted in any decrease in transmission, or provided any
           | benefit. I have seen many that showed the harms it imposed,
           | though.
           | 
           | These measures were ineffective. So, how do you justify
           | saying that a hospital's case load would increase by 2X if we
           | got rid of them, or had never done them?
        
             | DavidSJ wrote:
             | > According to the article, in the only large randomized
             | studies that have been performed, masking showed little, if
             | any benefit.
             | 
             | From the first one [1] they linked:
             | 
             | > odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23] ... Although the
             | difference observed was not statistically significant, the
             | 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23%
             | increase in infection. ...
             | 
             | Sounds like the issue is lack of statistical power. We
             | basically can't conclude much at all from that study, but
             | taken "at face value", that was an ~18% reduction in
             | transmission. Presumably this would compound if done for
             | longer or among more people due to exponential spread.
             | 
             | Compound an 18% reduction for three generations (about ~15
             | days) of viral spread and that's about a 45% reduction in
             | case load. Of course it's more complicated than that
             | because a faster-spreading virus will also reach saturation
             | of the susceptible population more quickly, but it does
             | mean lowering peak hospital load, as well as lowering R_0
             | which means the point of saturation is smaller, etc.
             | 
             | From the second one [2] they linked:
             | 
             | > Proper mask-wearing increased from 13.3% in the control
             | group to 42.3% in the intervention arm (adjusted percentage
             | point difference = 0.29 [0.26, 0.31]). The intervention
             | reduced symptomatic seroprevalence (adjusted prevalence
             | ratio (aPR) = 0.91 [0.82, 1.00])
             | 
             | So that's a 9% reduction (again, with a wide confidence
             | interval), as a result of increasing mask usage by only 29
             | percentage points. So if the signal's real, then presumably
             | increasing mask usage further, say up to 85%, would add a
             | very meaningful further reduction.
             | 
             | Again, we can assume that would compound if done for longer
             | or among a larger population.
             | 
             | **
             | 
             | Furthermore, there have been plenty of lab experiments on
             | masks which show them to be effective at filtering water
             | droplet-bound Covid particles. And Covid is not the first
             | virus we've ever encountered. In the absence of lots of
             | data specific to Covid, we can apply background scientific
             | knowledge about the effectiveness of masks in slowing the
             | spread of respiratory disease.
             | 
             | There are also costs to wearing masks, as well as to mask
             | mandates, which I'm not taking into account in this post.
             | But I wouldn't characterize the evidence as you have.
             | 
             | **
             | 
             | [1] https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M20-6817
             | 
             | [2] https://www.poverty-action.org/publication/impact-
             | community-...
        
               | claytongulick wrote:
               | I agree that we interpret the results of those studies
               | very differently.
               | 
               | I'd also suggest that we only regard lab studies with a
               | bit of intellectual curiosity, rather than a meaningful
               | focus. Lab studies are very different than the real world
               | where my son trades his batman mask for a friend's
               | spiderman mask because it's cooler :D
        
             | kareemm wrote:
             | > According to the article, in the only large randomized
             | studies that have been performed, masking showed little, if
             | any benefit.
             | 
             | I have this open in another tab. It links to three studies
             | that show masks in school do work:
             | 
             | https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/mask-
             | requirem...
             | 
             | > most studies, including WHO, show that lockdowns were
             | counter productive, and could result in increased
             | transmission.
             | 
             | Do you have a source for this?
        
               | benbenolson wrote:
               | The author of that blog post sees that states like
               | Tennessee and Texas had a high number of school closures,
               | but that plot is simply plotting raw numbers of school
               | closures. Not only are those numbers affected by a
               | plethora of variables (for example, population density,
               | population number, vaccination rates, number of schools,
               | closure policies...), but how could you possibly compare
               | raw numbers of school closures in individual states?
               | Then, they use this incredibly skewed plot to draw the
               | conclusion that "Public health mitigation measures in
               | schools, like mask requirements, work." Talk about
               | jumping to conclusions.
               | 
               | For the first two studies, these kinds of probabilities
               | are extremely dangerous and prone to "playing with the
               | data." Given the exact same dataset, one could draw
               | nearly any conclusion with such disparate and varied
               | data, especially when attempting to control for other
               | factors. Could these increased "change in daily number of
               | cases per 100,000 children" be due to other factors; for
               | example, a correlation between a mask policy and other
               | policies, such as closure and a decrease in class size?
               | I'm not saying that I know the answer, either, but plots
               | like this should be taken with a pinch of salt.
        
         | phailhaus wrote:
         | > Try taking a 6 hour flight with a 2 year old that's required
         | to keep his mask on the entire flight, and when he takes it off
         | (because he's 2, of course he's going to take it off) the
         | flight attendants threaten to turn the plane around and ban you
         | permanently.
         | 
         | Never heard about this, source? Toddlers tend to be somewhat
         | exempt from mask mandates because they're toddlers and everyone
         | understands when they don't comply.
        
           | ngngngng wrote:
           | https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2021/08/20/tsa-
           | exten...
           | 
           | The TSA mandate itself. Only those under age 2 are exempt
           | from it. This is just for the US obviously, not sure about
           | other places. But in my experience the less you paid for your
           | ticket the more strict the airline is. I typically don't fly
           | budget airlines but did once during the pandemic and that's
           | when a flight attendant shouted at me and my wife when our
           | toddler had taken his mask off and we didn't notice.
        
             | michaelmrose wrote:
             | They would probably be more patient and tolerant of
             | children if they hadn't spent 2 years dealing with
             | manchidren who scream at flight attendants and punch them
             | in the face. I've actually never seen anyone on an airplane
             | shout at all. Did they actually scream at you or merely
             | speak tersely?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | swamp40 wrote:
           | In Illinois, wife teaches 2-3 yr olds. Masks are mandatory,
           | all day long. Any pulldown gets pulled up. Nothing much goes
           | on in the classroom anymore besides mask compliance and
           | handwashing. It is INSANE.
           | 
           | We have two children. Both masked for 7 hours a day. Every
           | day. Both schools are VERY STRICT. Everybody is vaxxed and
           | boosted. Doesn't matter.
        
         | psyc wrote:
         | Wearing masks whenever possible doesn't bother me in the
         | slightest. I've been loving it that COVID has normalized
         | wearing a mask in public because I'd like to do it all the time
         | for the rest of my life without being judged for it.
         | 
         | But I don't want anybody mandating it. I've been trying to work
         | out in my own mind why I switched to being more, uh,
         | 'deontologist' if you will, several years ago. I'm just
         | starting to almost be able to articulate it. If you take a
         | consequentialist stance, then any catastrophe sufficient to put
         | your chosen 'utility' at risk _instantly_ justifies literally
         | any measure that mitigates that risk. As long as the measure is
         | outside the realm of the thing you regard as  'utility'. Is
         | free speech for its own sake not part of 'utility' but only a
         | means to increase it? Then out the window it goes when it
         | causes problems. Same for privacy, leaving your home without
         | permission from an authority, pretty much anything we think of
         | as freedom.
         | 
         | It greatly disturbs me to find the Overton Window in a place
         | where I see smart Americans debating every day whether strongly
         | authoritarian and invasive measures are OK, if they save lives.
        
           | ceras wrote:
           | If you haven't stumbled upon it already, you may enjoy
           | reading about rule utilitarianism:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_utilitarianism
           | 
           | > Rule utilitarians argue that following rules that tend to
           | lead to the greatest good will have better consequences
           | overall than allowing exceptions to be made in individual
           | instances, even if better consequences can be demonstrated in
           | those instances.
        
           | Hokusai wrote:
           | > Americans debating every day whether strongly authoritarian
           | and invasive measures are OK, if they save lives.
           | 
           | In Europe seatbelts are mandatory, and it is forbidden to
           | smoke in most places. I think that these are reasonable
           | measures. I think, for the exact same reasons, that mask
           | mandates are reasonable.
           | 
           | In public transport is mandatory to wear at least a t-shirt,
           | as skin to skin contact gets unhealthy fast. And restaurants
           | require to clean your hands after going to the toilet.
           | 
           | What does not fit with my idea about the USA is that you can
           | go naked in the street, as it seems quite a Puritan country.
           | And books being censured in schools for mildly nudeness also
           | seem to be the norm. Is not that worse that mask mandates?
           | 
           | Edit: seatbelt
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | In most of Europe masks for schoolchildren aren't
             | mandatory.
             | 
             | https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-school-mask-guidelines-fuel-
             | cul...
        
             | Georgelemental wrote:
             | The US is not as different as you think. Seat belts are
             | mandatory in 49/50 states, restrictions on smoking are
             | common, restaurant employees generally need to wash their
             | hands after going to the bathroom, "no shirt no shoes no
             | service" is the general rule, nudity in public places is
             | generally against the law. I don't know where you are
             | getting your impression of US laws from, but it's just
             | wrong.
        
               | meragrin_ wrote:
               | My take was not that the US does not have same/similar
               | rules, but that the US does have same/similar rules while
               | thinking mask mandates as somehow different from those.
        
               | iso1631 wrote:
               | > restaurant employees generally need to wash their hands
               | after going to the bathroom
               | 
               | I struggle to grasp a society where that has to be
               | mandated
        
               | ZoomerCretin wrote:
               | >I struggle to grasp a society where that has to be
               | mandated
               | 
               | You're probably unaware of the high prevalence of fecal
               | bacteria on public surfaces, then.
               | 
               | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16134485/
               | 
               | https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/29/mcdonalds-touchscreen-
               | kiosks...
               | 
               | "A study by U.K. newspaper Metro found gut and fecal
               | bacteria on touchscreens in all of the chain's
               | restaurants it surveyed. It took samples from the screens
               | in eight branches and found that they contained coliform
               | bacteria, a group of microorganisms found in people's
               | intestines as well as in soil and on plants."
        
             | smhenderson wrote:
             | _In Europe belts are mandatory_
             | 
             | I'm having a hard time understanding this one... Are you
             | literally saying that belts that hold people's pants up are
             | mandatory?
        
               | AzzieElbab wrote:
               | Yes. Down with with the Big Apparel
        
               | michaelmcdonald wrote:
               | Seat belts.
        
               | jrockway wrote:
               | I've been to Europe and never wore a belt, so they must
               | mean something else.
        
               | FourHand451 wrote:
               | Count your blessings, my friend.
        
               | maxsilver wrote:
               | It's probably a reference to seatbelts
        
               | smhenderson wrote:
               | Duh, thank you, that is completely obvious and why I
               | didn't get that reading it is beyond me!
        
               | nso95 wrote:
               | seatbelt?
        
         | xdennis wrote:
         | > although I believe they're more inconvenient for me than most
         | because I'm blind and no matter what I do they always fog up my
         | glasses
         | 
         | Sorry if this is an insensitive, stupid question, but why do
         | foggy glasses bother you if you're blind?
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | The majority of visually impaired people who are legally
           | classified as "blind" still have some visual perception and
           | glasses can help maximize that.
        
           | ngngngng wrote:
           | Sorry, left it vague for brevity. I'm unable to do all sorts
           | of things without glasses, such as reading or driving. I'm
           | not legally blind, I just have terrible vision. So if I'm in
           | a restaurant trying to see the menu and my mask causes my
           | glasses to fog up there's nothing I can do. I can't see
           | through the fog, and I can't read without glasses.
        
         | speedgeek wrote:
         | https://www.tabsynth.com/product/badger-seal-mask-fitter/ I
         | broke my nose playing baseball in high school and have an odd
         | shaped ridge that prevents the metal in the mask from forming a
         | tight seal. I use these to prevent fogging, works great for me.
        
         | not2b wrote:
         | The Atlantic has lots of writers (on staff as well as guest
         | writers) who have different positions. They do seem to be
         | running a lot more "I'm done with this" articles lately.
        
         | tootie wrote:
         | Katherine Wu has been a font of great information on Covid
         | issues, especially vaccines. I noticed she's not party to this
         | particular article. I'm wondering if she's gnashing her teeth
         | right now or about to launch a Twitter tirade. This could just
         | be The Atlantic giving space to a breadth of ideas rather than
         | an actual endorsement of their thesis.
         | 
         | And as a parent with two kids in school they have absolutely
         | zero complaints about their masks and wear them all day even
         | outside. They think they're cool and comfortable. Anecdote but
         | it definitely colors my opinion.
        
       | tamaharbor wrote:
       | My wife made my mask out of an old tee shirt using a pattern she
       | gleaned from the internet. I'm sure that it works. But I can
       | still smell the guy next to me at Wal Mart.
        
       | mattmiller wrote:
       | Why haven't states setup Covid only treatment centers to relieve
       | the pressure on hospitals? Sure there are only so many nurses and
       | doctors but reducing regulation on who could work in these
       | centers would fix that.
        
       | taylodl wrote:
       | General observation from reading the comments - the folks on HN
       | must not have many friends working in medicine for if they had
       | they'd realize those friends are swamped and burned-out. They'd
       | also know that pretty much the only condition we're treating
       | nowadays is Covid. Surgeries are continuing to be postponed -
       | including surgeries that can lead to worse problems down the road
       | such as removing cancerous tumors.
       | 
       | And it gets worse. My daughter is in pre-med. Apparently people
       | are dropping out like flies and not just because of the course
       | load. They're watching how medical professionals are being
       | treated and saying screw it! This should concern us all because
       | we've had a marked uptick of medical professionals
       | retiring/resigning since the pandemic started and now the
       | pipeline is thinning out.
       | 
       | We're walking headlong into a disaster and nobody seems to care.
       | And that's not even dealing with the problem of Global Climate
       | Change which, guess what? Still hasn't gone away and there
       | doesn't seem to be much interest in caring about that either, not
       | that there ever was.
       | 
       | You can see what our child-bearing aged children think of all
       | this - they're not having kids. I don't think this is a short-
       | term aberration. We're a population literally in decline.
        
         | stvswn wrote:
         | I find it kind of amazing that the justification for school
         | mask mandates (which was once "keep kids from getting covid")
         | has morphed into "we'll lower the load on hospitals if the kids
         | keep their faces covered."
         | 
         | Can anyone imagine if we went back to 2020 and pitched this to
         | parents? "Look, if your kid gets it, it will be similar in
         | nature to a chest cold. It's somewhat more dangerous for the
         | elderly. In order to keep doctors and nurses from getting
         | burned out, the kids are all going to wear masks all day. Other
         | than that, outside of school, we're all going to be pretty much
         | getting back to normal."
         | 
         | I have lost track of what the goalposts are. I am starting to
         | think that people just like the idea that children are
         | suffering, it must mean that we're taking the whole thing
         | seriously. As long as none of us are inconvenienced, right?
        
         | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
         | Isn't the whole point of the article that school mask mandates
         | probably don't reduce spread? If it doesn't reduce spread than
         | it won't help your overwhelmed friends working in medicine.
         | Sorry I guess I just don't understand what point you are trying
         | to make.
        
           | michaelmrose wrote:
           | The thesis of the article is that even though studies show
           | masks work studies in schools had obvious flaws and are
           | measuring multiple confounding factors ergo masks might not
           | work so we have no justification for mask mandates. This is
           | materially different from knowing they don't work.
           | 
           | I cannot countenance the idea that keeping most of your spit
           | with you rather than floating around the room doesn't reduce
           | spread of a respiratory virus. At best I would suggest
           | instead that schools ought to have had a mandate to use and
           | reuse sterilized n95 masks instead of a loosely fitting cloth
           | mask oft worn with the nose exposed.
        
             | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
             | Yeah I don't think they are really saying that they
             | absolutely don't work but that the evidence that they do is
             | weak enough to justify removing the mandates. They address
             | N95 mask in the article (did you read it) pointing out that
             | they are more difficult to breath in and hinder
             | communication more (I'll add my own point in that they are
             | harder to keep a seal with which seems to be quite
             | important according to the studies I have seen). Personally
             | I have used N95 mask quite a bit for sanding projects and
             | can to attest to the difficulty of wearing them for long
             | period in a properly fitting way.
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | There are a couple of things happening.
               | 
               | This 'they don't 100% work so we shouldn't even bother'
               | bullshit .. is just that. Bullshit.
               | 
               | What is the cost of masked students, it's the cost of the
               | masks. Now granted our schools are, frankly, criminally
               | underfunded. However that PPE could be supplied from
               | outside the school's budget for those students that don't
               | take care of the costs themselves.
               | 
               | The other problem that i've been hearing from my public
               | school teacher friends is that there are so many staff
               | absences due to covid that more and more students are
               | stuffed into the classrooms of those teachers that are
               | there. So if you, as a teacher, have a class that is down
               | 50% of students due to an outbreak but somehow you
               | managed to avoid it. Well your 50% empty class that
               | allows for better distancing will not last, you will be
               | at 100% or grater capacity simply because another teacher
               | is out, there are no available substitutes and you can't
               | leave kids unsupervised.
        
               | xyzzyz wrote:
               | > Now granted our schools are, frankly, criminally
               | underfunded.
               | 
               | They're not, they're one of the best funded schools in
               | the world.
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spendi
               | ng_...
               | 
               | the US is 66th by % of gdp
        
               | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
               | ah, so you didn't read the article I guess, because it
               | never says that they don't work 100% just says the
               | evidence that they do isn't great, it also covers what
               | the writer sees at downsides (cost) to masking children.
               | Its fine to have differing views but you should probably
               | focus your arguments on the substance of article. The
               | author laid out several very compelling paragraphs to
               | back up her point along with sources cited, so I'm sorry,
               | but if the only counter argument you can come up with is
               | "its bullshit" you should probably quit the debate club.
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | 1% effective is better than 0% effective. The best
               | defense is defense in depth.
        
               | orangecat wrote:
               | _What is the cost of masked students, it 's the cost of
               | the masks._
               | 
               | It's much more than that.
               | 
               |  _The other problem that i 've been hearing from my
               | public school teacher friends is that there are so many
               | staff absences due to covid_
               | 
               | Sure, and that's happening in schools with and without
               | mask mandates. Unless you go into full hermit mode, you
               | are going to be exposed to Omicron. And if you're young
               | or vaccinated, that's very unlikely to be a big deal.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | The cost of masked students is not just the purchase
               | price of the masks. It's that plus the reduction in
               | learning (academic, linguistic, and social) from wearing
               | the masks (and the masks being fussed over).
               | 
               | That total cost may (or may not) still support the
               | decision to have a mask mandate for kids, but let's not
               | get confused and think the only cost is measured in
               | dollars.
        
           | stvswn wrote:
           | His point is that the job satisfaction of adults is important
           | and saving it requires our collective agreement that 1+1=3.
           | 
           | The point of masking in schools was maybe, once, based on the
           | theory that it would keep the children and teachers safe.
           | Now, the point is that we must exert every lever of control
           | at our disposal. It just so happens that the only group of
           | people who we can reliably control are children, as they
           | cannot vote, do not have fully-formed civil rights, and (in
           | the main) are legally required to attend government run
           | schools each day.
           | 
           | So, while they'd love to make everyone else mask, they
           | realize they practically cannot -- so they focus on children.
           | It's grotesque.
        
           | orangecat wrote:
           | So many Covid (and other) policies are the result of "We must
           | do something. This is something."
        
         | rkk3 wrote:
         | What does this have to do with masking young children, many who
         | are vaccinated, in schools? Are you implying that they are a
         | source of the spread and causing medical professionals to be
         | burnt out? and that therefore we should ignore that both the
         | teacher and student wearing a mask might be detrimental for ESL
         | & Language development ?
        
         | kodah wrote:
         | > You can see what our child-bearing aged children think of all
         | this - they're not having kids. I don't think this is a short-
         | term aberration. We're a population literally in decline.
         | 
         | I'm one of these folks. I think it's wrong to blame this solely
         | on COVID. I won't have kids because my position in the United
         | States is nowhere near guaranteed. I have survived three
         | economic recessions, one of which I lost everything in and the
         | course of my life was permanently altered. I watched as society
         | adopted "the internet" and used it in terrifying detail. I've
         | watched as social problems turned into vitriol, anger, and at
         | times violence. I've watched as climate change was viewed as
         | either "conserve", "don't believe", or "innovate" with the
         | latter being the latest focus - none of which have worked and
         | each took myopic approaches to a very broad problem. I've
         | watched as society became polarized on such arbitrary lines as
         | politics, missing any nuance that may occur across the
         | spectrum; almost turned into a caricature of Star Wars. Home
         | prices are higher than they've ever been, inaccessible to even
         | moderately wealthy citizens.
         | 
         | I may not be on the money with each of my perspectives, though
         | I also don't think I'm really that far off. So riddle me this:
         | Why in the hell would I want to add one more responsibility
         | while dodging and dealing with the bullets of life as-we-know-
         | it today?
        
         | UncleOxidant wrote:
         | > My daughter is in pre-med. Apparently people are dropping out
         | like flies and not just because of the course load. They're
         | watching how medical professionals are being treated and saying
         | screw it!
         | 
         | And who can blame them at this point? If anything we need more
         | doctors/nurses/healthcare workers, but now we're going to be
         | moving in the wrong direction for many years.
        
         | baron816 wrote:
         | > My daughter is in pre-med. Apparently people are dropping out
         | like flies
         | 
         | This may not be a bad thing in the long run. There's a shortage
         | of medical professionals because the medical industry wants it
         | that way. If the crisis becomes acute enough, the government
         | will be forced to loosen regulations, and that would allow for
         | more people to enter the field faster and more easily.
        
           | convolvatron wrote:
           | _thats_ your takeaway? that if the damn government stopped
           | bothering to try to oversee outcomes in an area with extreme
           | information asymmetry, a desire to get treated regardless of
           | the cost, a bunch of agents between the doctor and the
           | patient taking their cut, and a massive problem with cost
           | control....everything would just be fine and we'd have plenty
           | of doctors.
        
             | baron816 wrote:
             | No. You're putting a bunch of words in my mouth.
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | The shortage of physicians is primarily caused not by
           | regulations but by lack of government funding for residency
           | programs.
           | 
           | https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-
           | fun...
        
             | xyzzyz wrote:
             | So we didn't have physicians before government started
             | funding residencies? I think not, I think we used to have
             | physicians just fine 100 years ago. So what changed?
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Medical education with residencies only really started in
               | about 1930. Before that there was no real consistency,
               | and the results were terrible in terms of iatrogenic
               | harm.
               | 
               | https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001936.htm
               | 
               | The other thing that changed in the past 100 years is
               | that Americans on average are older, sicker, and have
               | higher demand for healthcare.
        
         | clutchdude wrote:
         | As with many things, nuance is a subject that many on HN fail
         | to grasp.
         | 
         | They believe that masking is a binary decision and that once
         | made, the die is cast.
         | 
         | Rather, if we tied masking mandates to thresholds of community
         | spread and encouraged/provided high quality masks, the public
         | would at least show medical professionals we're interested in
         | keeping another body out of the morgue, aside from the obvious
         | vaccination need.
         | 
         | But I digress - there are many slow moving disasters that were
         | every so slightly accelerated by COVID that are only going to
         | surface in the years to come.
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | > They'd also know that pretty much the only condition we're
         | treating nowadays is Covid.
         | 
         | That claim is misinformation, please edit and delete. Medicine
         | as a field is very broad and plenty of other conditions are
         | being treated.
        
           | dsl wrote:
           | At your dentist or plastic surgery clinic, sure. Hospitals
           | everywhere are short on nurses and anything that can be
           | delayed still is. A friend was recently transfered to another
           | hospital to give birth because the maternity ward was
           | unstaffed.
        
         | tlear wrote:
         | People stopped having kids once they could(easily available
         | birth control). Trying to connect it to COVID or Climate change
         | is not supported by any data whatsoever.
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | Call it a vibe. I only see a steady decline in living
           | standards in our future and it makes me pause when I think
           | about whether to subject another human being (i.e. my kids)
           | to that.
        
             | tlear wrote:
             | We are living in the most safe, prosperous, easy, carefree
             | time in the history of human species. Can we fuck it up?
             | yes we probably can, it won't be easy and would need to
             | involve nukes probably.
             | 
             | Realize that doom and fear porn that you are reading
             | addresses certain type of need we have. If you overdo it
             | well you get depression. Then again some people I know use
             | this crap to give themselves excuse to behave like
             | teenagers in their 30s, stuck in childhood(because they
             | can).
        
             | sometimeshuman wrote:
             | There is no stigma these days for not starting a family
             | kids and men can privately retreat into video games and
             | pornography. When confronted about their selfish* lifestyle
             | the above comment is convenient cover but it is not backed
             | by solid data. I'd take birth in this past decade over
             | birth in my decade any day.
             | 
             | *I'd argue that not having at least one child and possibly
             | adopting others is selfish assuming one has financial
             | means. For example, while I thought I wanted kids, upon
             | reflection what I really wanted are mini-me's. If I could
             | buy a clone I'd do it immediately, but child roulette?, no
             | thanks. My selfish lifestyle had made me very happy so far
             | and that feels like a character flaw.
        
               | AussieWog93 wrote:
               | May I ask how old you are?
               | 
               | From where I am, a "selfish" lifestyle of video games and
               | porn replacing responsibility does not seem to be healthy
               | long-term.
               | 
               | I'm in my late 20s now, and the guys I know who are not
               | working towards getting married and starting a family are
               | pretty much all starting to experience some sort of
               | constant existential anxiety.
        
               | danbolt wrote:
               | Part of me thinks its the "working towards" part,
               | independent of the family/marriage bit. I can't prove it
               | though.
               | 
               | I think if you drop off the rails of a traditional
               | lifestyle, you need to be ready to stand on your own two
               | feet a little more when it comes to intrinsic motivation.
        
           | smolder wrote:
           | Birth control is not the only factor that has affected birth
           | rates, even if it's the biggest. There are many factors. Any
           | connection to COVID or climate change may not supported by
           | any data you've seen, but does that entitle you to
           | categorically rule it out as a factor? Where's this data that
           | shows no relationship? I've seen a number of indications
           | young people are increasingly hopeless about the future. It
           | stands to reason that this could effect birth rates so I feel
           | there's at least a small burden on you to show why the idea
           | is wrong.
        
             | tlear wrote:
             | I mean it is possible somewhere in the rounding error or
             | the rounding error of the effect contraceptives had there
             | is climate change and covid effect. Massaging that out of
             | the data will will be tricky to say the least, but given
             | enough grant money I am sure people will rise to the
             | occasion.
        
           | iso1631 wrote:
           | Yes, having plunged dramatically in the 60s with the
           | widespread adoption of the pill, birth rate in the US has
           | been falling in a fairly steady rate since about 1970
           | 
           | https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-
           | states/birt...
        
         | concinds wrote:
         | Genuinely asking -
         | 
         | What's stopping a country, or hospital, from saying: "we'll
         | prioritize cancer patients, scheduled surgeries, normal
         | operation; you come in with Covid respiratory distress, and
         | we're full? Go away." From the government data I've found,
         | Covid patients are about 5-20% of emergency department patients
         | in the US[0]; in Switzerland that leaves a healthy amount of
         | free beds[1] (though I'm sure staffing is another issue). Why
         | are they causing such disruption? And if they are, why are we
         | not having a debate about whether all the additional cancer
         | deaths, heart attack deaths (from deprogrammed surgeries and
         | screenings) are worth it? In what way is this "healthcare
         | catastrophe" not partly avoidable?
         | 
         | > You can see what our child-bearing aged children think of all
         | this - they're not having kids. I don't think this is a short-
         | term aberration. We're a population literally in decline.
         | 
         | That's been happening long before Corona, and I doubt it has
         | much do do with politics or "optimism about climate change"
         | compared with wages, housing, etc.
         | 
         | [0]: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/nhcs/hospital-encounters-
         | by...
         | 
         | [1]: https://www.covid19.admin.ch/en/hosp-
         | capacity/icu?time=phase...
        
           | dec0dedab0de wrote:
           | I believe the EMTALA means a hospital can't deny you
           | emergency treatment. Though what defines an emergency can be
           | kind of murky. They could certainly evaluate most covid
           | patients and send them home with Tylenol, or make them sit in
           | their car while they let gunshot wounds in. I also think
           | there is government money available for hospitals treating
           | covid patients, so it is in the hospital's interest to not
           | turn them away.
           | 
           | Some anecdotal evidence, I went through cancer treatment
           | starting Feb 2020, ending Feb 2021, with a few scans since.
           | Including one in a few days. I have never had any of my
           | numerous appointments postponed for covid. But I think it is
           | because I am lucky enough to afford to be treated by a
           | hospital with a large cancer department.
        
           | mensetmanusman wrote:
           | At least in my area, I have heard of people being turned away
           | from hospitals (where they are going due to covid symptoms)
           | because of their vaccination status.
        
           | taylodl wrote:
           | I've asked my friends working in medicine the same thing.
           | What if hospitals were to start turning away those who are
           | willingly unvaccinated? I haven't been able to get a clear
           | answer but the basic theme I hear is you can't, state law
           | prohibits that. Of course the law can be changed, but what
           | legislature is going to do that? This is where politics
           | enters the fray. They'd rather kick the can down the road and
           | bring in the National Guard to help run the hospitals than
           | turn away patients and potentially face voter wrath.
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | For hospitals it's the federal EMTALA law which makes it
             | illegal for hospitals to deny emergency care on the basis
             | of vaccination status. If a patient shows up with unstable
             | vital signs then the hospital is required to at least
             | stabilize them. For COVID-19 patients that's usually based
             | on respiratory distress or low blood oxygen saturation.
             | 
             | https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-
             | Guidance/Legislation/EMT...
        
               | boilerupnc wrote:
               | So, we essentially have mandates to "treat" with no
               | corresponding agreement on defining any mandates to
               | "prevent". Prevention mandates could be a tapestry of
               | options and defined within specific contextual and
               | cultural boundaries. But having nothing on the "prevent"
               | tilts the scale entirely to obligatory treatment and
               | clearly feels imbalanced.
        
             | lancesells wrote:
             | I'm vaccinated and think everyone capable of receiving the
             | vaccine should get it but turning people away is cruel.
             | That's science-fiction dystopia cruelty in my opinion. Now
             | if a hospital is full and at capacity maybe there are some
             | calculations but just turning people away is wrong.
        
           | psychlops wrote:
           | Most people don't die from covid, they die with covid and
           | their multiple comorbidities. I think it would bring up
           | multiple issues. I have many questions about the approach.
           | Would you turn away someone who is asymptomatic but covid
           | positive? What if they were turned away due to false positive
           | covid test? What if they contracted covid from the hospital?
           | What if they are vaccinated and still get covid?
           | 
           | I suspect it could easily lead to broader exemptions and
           | eventually bring up the issue of other infectious diseases
           | not being treated.
        
         | youniverse wrote:
         | I'll throw into this that my friend at a big hospital in
         | Topeka, Kansas says all overnight surgeries are canceled so to
         | staff shortage. Including heart surgery. Crazy.
        
         | tjr225 wrote:
         | > And it gets worse. My daughter is in pre-med. Apparently
         | people are dropping out like flies and not just because of the
         | course load. They're watching how medical professionals are
         | being treated and saying screw it! This should concern us all
         | because we've had a marked uptick of medical professionals
         | retiring/resigning since the pandemic started and now the
         | pipeline is thinning out.
         | 
         | You should be angry at corporate healthcare that has
         | prioritized financial efficiency and monetary gain over doing
         | its job and treating healthcare workers fairly, not strangers
         | on hackernews.
         | 
         | > We're a population literally in decline.
         | 
         | No, no we're _literally_ not. Not as of right now at least; the
         | US population grew over the last year. But- even if we were,
         | wouldn't that directly address the unrelated issue of climate
         | change that you brought up?
        
           | onedognight wrote:
           | It's only increasing due to immigration, if I'm reading this
           | correctly.
           | 
           | https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio.
           | ..
        
             | adamrezich wrote:
             | ah, so everything is going according to plan then.
             | 
             | downvoters: is this outcome undesirable? if so, why, and
             | what can we do to fix it? because I'm pretty sure you're
             | not supposed to say that having more kids is a good thing,
             | and using immigration/migration as a means of replacing
             | those kids we're not having is a bad thing.
             | 
             | thus, is this outcome (declining citizen birth rates,
             | increased immigration/migration compensating for it) not
             | the intended, desired one?
        
               | AussieWog93 wrote:
               | (I think you may have been downvoted because your initial
               | comment appeared to be referencing the "White Genocide"
               | conspiracy theory - essentially the idea that the Jews
               | are planning to slowly eliminate the white race in the
               | West and replace them with blacks and Muslims.)
        
             | pge wrote:
             | Not yet - if you look on pages 5 and 6 of that report, you
             | see that births still exceed deaths in the US. Without
             | immigration, though, population will stop growing in the
             | next two decades (but it hasnt stopped yet).
        
         | lr1970 wrote:
         | > They'd also know that pretty much the only condition we're
         | treating nowadays is Covid.
         | 
         | This statement might be true for your location but is not true
         | in general. Here in New York City hospitalizations due to covid
         | are not very high and going down quickly. Elective surgeries
         | and procedures go on as scheduled. ICUs are not overrun with
         | covid specific cases. Majority of the patients with positive
         | PCR test are hospitalized for medical reasons other than covid.
         | Recorded deaths do not differentiate between "died from covid"
         | and "died while covid positive" making death statistics hard to
         | interpret. In general, compared to the situation on the ground
         | in March-April 2020 this time the covid load on NYC hospital
         | system is lighter.
         | 
         | The biggest challenge is staffing shortages in the hospitals
         | due to general burn-out, people being on sick leave due to
         | spreading omicron. Noticeable percentage of nurses were laid
         | off because of the vaccine mandate (i am not judging the
         | mandate, just stating the consequence).
         | 
         | SOURCE: several physician relatives and friends working in NYC
         | hospitals (Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn).
        
           | perardi wrote:
           | NYTimes has a pretty good source on this.
           | 
           | https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-
           | hospitals-...
           | 
           | I'll tell you that here in Chicago, based off data, and
           | anecdotes: really depends on the neighborhood. Vaccinated
           | areas? Doing fine. Undervaccinated areas? Not doing so well.
           | 
           | Gosh, it's like vaccines work and that's the way out of this.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | colpabar wrote:
             | > Gosh, it's like vaccines work and that's the way out of
             | this.
             | 
             | You know, I see snarky little comments like this becoming
             | more and more common on this site, and I'd just like to
             | point out that they are not helpful in any way. Who is it
             | directed towards? Do you think you are convincing _anyone_
             | , or encouraging a productive discussion? I'd be willing to
             | bet that the overwhelming majority of people on this
             | website are vaccinated. I know I am.
             | 
             | In my opinion, that line is the equivalent of saying "gosh,
             | maybe black people should just stop committing crimes if
             | they don't want to go to jail" or "gosh, maybe gay people
             | should just stop having unprotected sex if they don't want
             | HIV."
             | 
             | I am begging you, and everyone else, PLEASE, if you want to
             | make a point, please do it in a respectful way that doesn't
             | assume anyone who disagrees is stupid. If you need to be
             | snarky, go do it on the-site-that-must-not-be-named.
        
               | watersb wrote:
               | I actually want to hear good reasons for avoiding
               | vaccinations, because many people care a lot about that.
               | 
               | I can understand immuno-compromised people, an underlying
               | medical condition, for whom a vaccine may not work or may
               | be dangerous. Undergoing chemotherapy treatment for
               | cancer? Got it: vaccines won't help you (or anyone else)
               | until you can get past the cancer.
               | 
               | I don't agree with an argument from stand-my-ground, my-
               | body-my-choice principles. I could agree with such a line
               | of reasoning, _if_ a personal choice did not present an
               | immediate danger to anyone else.
               | 
               | This is a very infectious disease with severe health
               | consequences. No one has control over the outcome, if
               | they choose to infect another person. Maybe it's no big
               | deal for them. Or maybe it wrecks their life, long after
               | the vaccine objector has left the scene.
               | 
               | What are some other reasons for avoiding vaccination?
        
               | endisneigh wrote:
               | Nobody here is advocating for avoiding vaccinations so
               | your entire point is moot.
        
               | reanimus wrote:
               | I think if we're supposed to treat the position against
               | vaccination being effective as "not stupid", we ought to
               | hear reasons why that is.
        
               | colpabar wrote:
               | My point is that if you insinuate that anyone who holds
               | that position is stupid through sarcasm and snarky
               | comments, you are never going to hear those reasons,
               | because no one will want to engage with you.
        
               | endisneigh wrote:
               | Even if it's stupid, what exactly is saying that going to
               | accomplish other than feigning some superiority over the
               | unvaccinated?
        
               | ifyoubuildit wrote:
               | Having already had an infection before you were able to
               | get vaccinated.
               | 
               | A recent CDC study [0] joins plenty of others from last
               | year in showing that these people were at least as
               | protected from infections and severe outcomes during
               | delta as those who were vaccinated without a prior
               | infection.
               | 
               | Avoiding getting something that offers little benefit and
               | offers even small risks makes sense to me.
               | 
               | You've probably spent the last year being told these
               | people are trying to murder your family though, so it
               | also makes sense to me if you don't agree with this.
               | 
               | [0]: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm?
               | s_cid=mm...
        
               | seanmcdirmid wrote:
               | > You know, I see snarky little comments like this
               | becoming more and more common on this site, and I'd just
               | like to point out that they are not helpful in any way.
               | 
               | It just represents a general fatigue that a lot of people
               | have with the anti vaxxers. That we have hard numbers
               | that vaccines actually work seems to be irrelevant to
               | them, so maybe they would be convinced by snark and
               | sarcasm instead?
               | 
               | > In my opinion, that line is the equivalent of saying
               | "gosh, maybe black people should just stop committing
               | crimes if they don't want to go to jail" or "gosh, maybe
               | gay people should just stop having unprotected sex if
               | they don't want HIV."
               | 
               | You are comparing getting a couple of free shots at the
               | pharmacy to much more complicated lifestyle
               | circumstances.
        
               | wallacoloo wrote:
               | > It just represents a general fatigue that a lot of
               | people have with the anti vaxxers. That we have hard
               | numbers that vaccines actually work seems to be
               | irrelevant to them, so why maybe they would be convinced
               | by snark and sarcasm instead?
               | 
               | and you think this is an experience unique to your
               | viewpoint? do you think the people reading your words who
               | have vaguely opposing views might not also be fatigued
               | when your group flatly denies their concerns are
               | irrelevant?
               | 
               | if you find yourself in an us-vs-them mindset and decide
               | to ditch empathy, all you do is widen the divide.
        
               | reanimus wrote:
               | > Who is it directed towards?
               | 
               | I imagine toward the people who behave as if vaccines
               | aren't effective, which are nonzero.
               | 
               | > In my opinion, that line is the equivalent of saying
               | "gosh, maybe black people should just stop committing
               | crimes if they don't want to go to jail" or "gosh, maybe
               | gay people should just stop having unprotected sex if
               | they don't want HIV."
               | 
               | I mean. The latter statement is a thing gay people
               | actually DID say, long before the government told them
               | to. Gay people noticed that it was spread through sex and
               | that condoms work. Not even going to touch the former
               | statement since I don't feel like wading into the
               | criminalization of black people. Suffice to say, not
               | convinced by either of these comparisons.
               | 
               | > I am begging you, and everyone else, PLEASE, if you
               | want to make a point, please do it in a respectful way
               | that doesn't assume anyone who disagrees is stupid. If
               | you need to be snarky, go do it on the-site-that-must-
               | not-be-named.
               | 
               | I'd label your preceding statement to be snarky, fwiw.
        
               | unethical_ban wrote:
               | I don't think comments like that are meant to convince
               | anyone.
               | 
               | There are vanishingly few circumstances other than
               | legitimate medical conflicts that warrant being
               | unvaccinated. Namely, crippling anxiety of
               | planning/scheduling the appointment, or being misled by
               | trusted advisors (Fox Entertainment or doctors who should
               | have their medical license revoked).
               | 
               | Other than that, I have very little patience or sympathy.
        
               | rnk wrote:
               | I think repeating accurate facts is an important thing.
               | Because the random complaints in incorrect and bizarre
               | negative anti-vax claims pass by without someone
               | addressing them often.
               | 
               | What is real and true matters. There's lots of things
               | that are hard to decide, but we know that they're not
               | millions of hidden deaths from getting vaccinated, and we
               | know that there are millions of people protected from
               | dying because they got vaccinated.
        
             | abduhl wrote:
             | What are the demographics of each of your identified
             | cohorts? For example, if the south side is under vaccinated
             | (whatever that means) and doing poorly then it seems a
             | little disingenuous to act like their medical care wasn't
             | subpar prior to Covid.
        
         | perardi wrote:
         | Yes, and?
         | 
         | The hospital case load is overwhelmingly, screamingly,
         | massively dominated by the elderly unvaccinated.
         | 
         | https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/1600/coronavirus/...
         | 
         | Given the extremely contagious nature of Omicron, what
         | plausible way do we have to prevent these individuals from
         | getting COVID and using hospital space? And don't say masking
         | up kids--because if they haven't gotten vaccinated, _then why
         | do you think they themselves would wear masks and social
         | distance to prevent themselves from getting COVID?_
         | 
         | I have seen no plausible modeling that shows even high level of
         | masking would significantly blunt the spread of this.
         | 
         | https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america?view...
         | 
         | So why make the kids put on hair shirts I mean masks?
         | 
         | Oh, and by the way: I have plenty of sympathy towards health
         | care workers. I am dating a nurse. I have doctors, nurses, and
         | paramedics as friends. I have extreme empathy towards them, and
         | full seething burning anger towards the unvaccinated
         | septuagenarians ruining our health care system. And the rest of
         | our economy while they're at it.
        
           | dsl wrote:
           | I know multiple households where the initial infection vector
           | was the kids. Grandpa might be stupid and refuse the vaccine,
           | but keeping little Billy from becoming a carrier lessens the
           | hospital load. If screaming Karens are going to insist on in
           | person learning, we need to mask test and vaccinate in the
           | schools.
        
             | tqi wrote:
             | 1. If your Grandpa chose to not get vaccinated and gets
             | COVID, thats his problem.
             | 
             | 2. The idea that anyone who wants in person learning is a
             | "screaming Karen" is fucking stupid. There is lots of
             | evidence that remote learning has all kinds of negative
             | outcomes for kids, and your (frankly sexist) dismissiveness
             | is the reason this conversation never goes anywhere.
        
               | aqme28 wrote:
               | > If your Grandpa chose to not get vaccinated and gets
               | COVID, thats his problem.
               | 
               | Unfortunately though that's not true. It's putting a huge
               | burden on hospitals that affects us all.
        
               | tqi wrote:
               | True, but thats a % of a % of a % (ie Masks could prevent
               | some % of COVID transmission at school, of some % of
               | which would have be transmitted to other individuals in
               | the home, of which some % of which would have required
               | hospitalization), which makes it seem likely to be a high
               | cost for not much reward.
        
               | gkbrk wrote:
               | > If your Grandpa chose to not get vaccinated and gets
               | COVID, thats his problem.
               | 
               | Sure thing. Can we get the Grandpa's to sign documents
               | saying they're going unvaccinated by choice and would
               | like to opt-out from any hospital care related to COVID
               | if their resources are needed for any other patient?
        
             | stvswn wrote:
             | You somehow manage to be condescending against all parties
             | here.
             | 
             | Calling mothers who want their children to receive an in-
             | person education "screaming Karens" is terribly out of
             | touch.
             | 
             | I have young children, and my position is simple: the
             | hospital load, the vaccination status of the elderly, the
             | burn out of the teachers -- it's not my child's burden.
             | It's the adults' burden.
             | 
             | You are free to wear a mask for the rest of your life for
             | all I care. I find it pathetic, but I really don't care.
             | But you and people like you do not deserve power over my
             | children, and if you don't see the reckoning coming you are
             | not paying close enough attention.
        
               | katbyte wrote:
               | Maybe take your kids out of public school then? Your kids
               | are not the only ones there and don't take priority over
               | everyone else's (and the teaches)
        
             | perardi wrote:
             | Or...grandpa can get vaccinated.
             | 
             | I'd be more than happy to test and vaccinate in schools. In
             | particular vaccinate. But having kids wear masks...which
             | they don't do well, because they're kids...not like adults
             | do it well either...is a fig leaf. It's not going to work.
             | And you can see that _from the massive infection rates in
             | schools that have masks_.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | Is there a massive infection rate? My kid's elementary
               | school sends an email with the count of positive test
               | results in the school each week. It seems like it's
               | consistently under 1% per week. (Typically 1-4 people
               | testing positive in a city K-5 school, students and staff
               | being tested.)
        
               | bcrosby95 wrote:
               | Our school has seemed to do OK keeping it from spreading
               | between kids.
               | 
               | But they also do weekly testing. And did surveillance
               | testing at the end of winter break, which kept about 15%
               | of the school's students at home for the first week back
               | because they had covid.
               | 
               | This statistic was also consistent with LA Unified
               | surveillance testing after winter break - about 15%.
               | 
               | Before winter break, some parents of 2nd graders had an
               | indoor, maskless, holiday party. Apparently all the kids
               | got covid. Then gave it to the teachers - all 4 2nd grade
               | teachers were out of school with covid the week before
               | winter break. But from what our school's testing showed,
               | it didn't spread beyond that.
               | 
               | I do know of a couple families who did seem to get covid
               | from their school though.
        
               | amerkhalid wrote:
               | Another thing I wonder about is what are the affects of
               | wearing masks at young age and not getting usual amount
               | of exposure to viruses and other germs.
               | 
               | I remember reading here and elsewhere that early
               | childhood exposure to germs builds a robust immune
               | system.
               | 
               | While my kid doesn't wear mask in his class but his
               | school is following very strict cleaning procedures. So
               | he hasn't gotten sick as much before pandemic. Maybe that
               | is good, definitely easier on us. Maybe we will always
               | have higher level of hygiene now. Or maybe in future
               | there will be a lot of young adults with underdeveloped
               | immune system.
        
               | watersb wrote:
               | Good question.
               | 
               | I believe that it's common for kids to wear masks during
               | flu season in some countries. They probably have some
               | relevant data.
               | 
               | I think there's a belief that strict adherence to
               | vaccination and masks would get us to a place where we
               | won't need masks all the time, and kids can resume their
               | usual immune-system adventures. That might be less
               | realistic than we might want. I don't know.
        
               | dsl wrote:
               | Of course all of our problems go away when you convince
               | the remaining 40% of the population to get vaccinated.
               | 
               | I'm actually in favor of doing away with masks and social
               | distancing. Just create a nationwide policy that the
               | unvaccinated will not be admitted or treated for COVID
               | and we can all return to our daily lives.
        
               | fullstackchris wrote:
               | I'd argue it in a more adult way than just punishing
               | those who are different from you. Just do away with the
               | masking and social distancing regardless. As soon as we
               | were throwing out the first doses of expired vaccine, the
               | choice by every american to get vaccinated or not had
               | been made. If the hospitals are overrun, it will be the
               | unvaccinated, so they'll be punished anyway - no need to
               | legally do it.
               | 
               | Also you need to update your Sam Harris stats, its not
               | 40% unvaccinated anymore like some outlets continue to
               | harp on, check CDC numbers, its closer to only 20% of the
               | population remaining.
        
               | rthille wrote:
               | https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-
               | tracker/#vaccinations_vacc-... I guess it depends on what
               | you mean by vaccinated: 75.1% of total us population has
               | had at least on dose (79.8% of eligible (>= 5 yr) Fully
               | vaccinated drops to 63.6/67.6% And Boosted is at only 41%
               | of the fully vaccinated, 86.5M.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | RubberMullet wrote:
               | All of our problems go away?! Which demographic do you
               | think this policy will affect the most, for example, in
               | California[0]?
               | 
               | [0]: https://covid19.ca.gov/state-dashboard/#ethnicity-
               | gender-age
        
               | sleepybrett wrote:
               | Convincing that 40% to get vaccinated while members of
               | our elected government preach to that particular choir
               | about how things that are partially or mostly effective
               | (masking, vaccines, etc) are NOT effective simply because
               | they are not 100% effective is a losing battle.
               | 
               | Watch the widely circulated video of the Florida's
               | nomination hearing for their new Surgeon General, where a
               | democrat asks the nominee if he, yes or no, believes the
               | vaccines to be effective. It was asked five times, his
               | answers were nothing but stuttering, rambling,
               | dissembling, meandering madness ('i mean what does
               | effective actually mean' level bullshit). The republicans
               | passed him out of committee once the democrats walked out
               | in frustration.
               | 
               | We have a party that is in full denial mode because
               | that's what their anti-vax constituents want to hear. The
               | only upside might be that their vote share goes down
               | because their constituents die in higher numbers.
        
       | aidenn0 wrote:
       | I live somewhere with mild winters so the schools don't have any
       | hallways (the classrooms just open to the outside). This meant
       | that kids could at least get a break from masking between
       | classes. However, after coming back from winter break, the
       | schools started mandating masks _outside_ as well as in, and
       | including during PE class. As you can imagine, my asthmatic
       | daughter was not pleased.
        
         | fifteenforty wrote:
         | What type of mask is she wearing?
        
           | aidenn0 wrote:
           | She switched from cloth to paper and it did improve things
           | somewhat; I think a lot of the effect is that it seals less
           | on the side though, so the results of them requiring masks
           | outside is that my daughter is wearing a less effective mask
           | inside.
        
             | fifteenforty wrote:
             | Have you tried her in an N95?
        
               | aidenn0 wrote:
               | I've worn those during fire season; I feel like any
               | benefit from breathing would be erased by how
               | uncomfortable they are on the face.
        
           | andreareina wrote:
           | I'm a former asthmatic. Even cloth masks are restrictive
           | enough that they'd have been an issue for me.
        
             | edgyquant wrote:
             | Yeah me as well + I wear glasses so I can't see unless the
             | weather is absolutely perfect (little humidity etc.)
        
               | IX-103 wrote:
               | It turns out a good fitting mask is essential for
               | comfort. I had a problem with masks being hard to breathe
               | in and fogging up my glasses. Then I found a good set of
               | N95 masks that have a real solid fit. It's loose and
               | flexible enough to be breathable, and has a solid seal
               | across the nose so moisture doesn't get near my glasses.
               | You can tell it's a good fit because it deflates/inflates
               | likes a balloon when you breathe.
        
             | GekkePrutser wrote:
             | Me too :( it feels like people like us are forgotten.
             | 
             | But I saw Denmark has just dropped all covid measures
             | including masks so hopefully we're all getting there
        
             | margalabargala wrote:
             | I actually have the opposite experience with my exercise-
             | induced asthma.
             | 
             | It's quite dry and cold where I am currently, due to
             | winter. Wearing a cloth mask increases the temperature and
             | humidity of the air I breathe when working hard, and makes
             | it less likely that asthma will be triggered.
             | 
             | It's a significant enough effect that I will sometimes wear
             | a cloth mask specifically for this effect when doing
             | something strenuous outdoors.
        
               | aidenn0 wrote:
               | That would probably be true if we lived somewhere with
               | actual winters. My daughter's PE class is in the
               | afternoon, and the lowest high-temperature we've had all
               | winter is 63.
        
         | sul_tasto wrote:
         | perhaps an unmask would be helpful: https://www.getunmask.com/
        
           | hydrok9 wrote:
           | just bought one too! thank you
        
           | tsycho wrote:
           | From their website (About/Disclaimer):
           | 
           | _The Unmask is not designed or intended to prevent, mitigate,
           | treat, diagnose or cure any disease or health condition,
           | including COVID-19/Coronavirus. Unmasks are intended for
           | general public use only. They are non-sterile and are not
           | intended for use in any clinical or surgical setting or where
           | exposure to bodily or hazardous fluids may be expected, where
           | the risk of exposure through inhalation is high, or near
           | intense heat or flammable gas. Unmasks are not surgical
           | masks, personal protective equipment, or filtering
           | respirators (such as N95 masks)._
           | 
           | Basically, it seems like a soft, breathable mask.....but they
           | make no claims that they will significantly reduce your
           | chances of catching Covid from someone nearby. That said, if
           | the only goal is to meet masking requirements in public
           | places, then it "works".
        
             | rhino369 wrote:
             | Read between the lines. They are marketing for people who
             | don't want to wear a mask but have to. These "masks" are
             | designed to do the bare minimum to get you onto an
             | airplane. It's not supposed to protect you.
        
               | copperx wrote:
               | Surgical masks do the same. They're easy to breathe in,
               | they offer little protection, and you can board an
               | airplane with them. I don't see the point.
        
               | rhino369 wrote:
               | These are supposed to easier to breath in. Surgical masks
               | still fog my glasses. Whether the product delivers on
               | those claims, I have no idea.
        
               | twic wrote:
               | People buying this mask disappoint me. They should at
               | least go full hose:
               | 
               | https://fakemaskworldwide.com/the-offensively-fake-fake-
               | mask...
        
             | jdminhbg wrote:
             | All of this, down to the disclaimer, also applies to the
             | ubiquitous normal cloth masks, so it's hardly a strike
             | against them.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | It's absolutely a strike against them, considering all of
               | that does _not_ apply to normal cloth masks
               | intentionally.
               | 
               | The makers of this mask deliberately choose to make a
               | product that does not improve collective safety, and that
               | malicious attitude deserves to be jailed, not rewarded.
        
               | jdminhbg wrote:
               | No, it absolutely applies to normal cloth masks. In fact,
               | as far as I can tell, that disclaimer is simply copied
               | and pasted from other sites selling cloth masks, for
               | example: https://teepublic.zendesk.com/hc/en-
               | us/articles/360047284753...
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | It does not apply to "normal" cloth masks, and it's
               | deliberately misleading to say otherwise, because if it
               | _were_ true about  "normal" cloth masks, then these masks
               | would not be more breathable.
        
               | jdminhbg wrote:
               | I don't know how to be more clear that the disclaimer is
               | the same than to link you to a site selling normal cloth
               | masks with the exact same disclaimer.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | And I don't know how to be more clear that the disclaimer
               | is not the only set of facts in this situation.
        
               | jdminhbg wrote:
               | Maybe you should have read up thread to see what I was
               | responding to then? This is a thread about the
               | disclaimer.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Nope, it's a thread about how dishonest these mask makers
               | are, considering you're now in _my_ thread.
        
             | fortuna86 wrote:
             | So it's a cloth mask, which have been shown to barely
             | protect you at all.
             | 
             | > The Unmask is not designed or intended to prevent,
             | mitigate, treat, diagnose or cure any disease or health
             | condition, including COVID-19/Coronavirus.
             | 
             | That goes beyond the "this isn't an n95 mask" - this is
             | actually saying this mask is purely performative. Which is
             | the accusation anti-maskers make. So they become what they
             | accuse others of doing.
             | 
             | Great business.
        
           | occamrazor wrote:
           | On their website I couldn't find any statement about their
           | effectiveness, nor any certification.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | tenuousemphasis wrote:
             | You're being sarcastic, right? If not, that's the entire
             | point. These are designed to fail any tests but cursory
             | visual inspection.
        
               | occamrazor wrote:
               | At first I thought that the website was sarcastic. But
               | they are unironically selling those "unmasks" without
               | making it clear that they are as useful as a fishnet
               | mask.
        
               | speeder wrote:
               | I went to check the site after your comment, and found
               | this, and the letters weren't even small:
               | 
               | Disclaimer
               | 
               | The Unmask is not designed or intended to prevent,
               | mitigate, treat, diagnose or cure any disease or health
               | condition, including COVID-19/Coronavirus. Unmasks are
               | intended for general public use only. They are non-
               | sterile and are not intended for use in any clinical or
               | surgical setting or where exposure to bodily or hazardous
               | fluids may be expected, where the risk of exposure
               | through inhalation is high, or near intense heat or
               | flammable gas. Unmasks are not surgical masks, personal
               | protective equipment, or filtering respirators (such as
               | N95 masks).
        
               | talideon wrote:
               | In other words, they exist to put others at potential
               | risk.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | For people like me, it's either this option or an
               | exemption. No longer will I put other people's health
               | above my own. Triple vaxxed and willing to get as many as
               | I need. But feeling like I'm suffocating is no longer an
               | option. If you don't have breathing/anxiety issues (or
               | both), you don't know what it's like and I;d encourage
               | you to avoid the snideness.
        
               | talideon wrote:
               | I have chronic lung issues. It's not snideness. People
               | who use fake masks put my life at risk. I've literally
               | spent the past two years being terrified.
               | 
               | So yes, I do have breathing and anxiety issues, but my
               | breathing issues are because I've crappy lungs, and I'd
               | prefer to _not_ be around those who consider my life less
               | worthy than their own.
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | Sorry. I just feel like I've reached a breaking point
               | myself. Honestly, the only reason i don't have an
               | exemption now is because I didn't want to freak other
               | people out, or feel selfish because I don't have a life-
               | threatening condition. I think people like me just can't
               | imagine living this way much longer, my quality of life
               | has truly sucked this year, in particular.
               | 
               | But it's not the same as what you have to deal with,
               | genuinely fearing for your life.
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | You are vaccinated and boosted. That is what protects
               | you. Not somebody else wearing a mask.
               | 
               | It isn't societies job to cater to fully vaccinated
               | individuals who remain terrified of Covid. Such an
               | expectation is what is truly selfish.
        
               | draw_down wrote:
        
               | jonpurdy wrote:
               | Bonus points for ingenuity, I guess? /s
               | 
               | As a non-American considering going through the Green
               | Card process and with an American-born daughter, stuff
               | like this dampens my enthusiasm for living here long
               | term. I guess the USA is just a place with an enormous
               | spectrum of opinions...
        
           | xenonite wrote:
           | Ironically, they offer four different sizes, while I yet
           | haven't found FFP2 masks in more than in one size.
        
             | YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo wrote:
             | Buy good ones like the 3M Aurora and you get at least 3
             | size options...
        
           | cloutchaser wrote:
           | Wow. The market really does solve for every possible niche.
        
             | Minor49er wrote:
             | Their mention of air travel also makes me think of how the
             | government brought in TSA checkpoints, but a company called
             | Clear allows people to mostly bypass it for a fee. It would
             | be nice if we didn't have these restrictions plus people
             | finding ways to profit off of getting around them. Just get
             | rid of both.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > the government brought in TSA checkpoints,
               | 
               | The government brought in the TSA to take over
               | checkpoints and relieve the air transport industry for
               | liability for failures of and abuses at the checkpoints
               | as part of the post-9/11 air transport industry bailout;
               | the checkpoints had existed for a long time.
        
               | rhino369 wrote:
               | Yep, pre-911 you still had to go through a metal detector
               | and get your stuff x-rayed. Taking off your shoes and no
               | fluids are the only new restrictions really.
        
               | panzagl wrote:
               | The TSA was a huge improvement over the understaffed and
               | indifferent private contractors that used to run airport
               | checkpoints when it first started. Things didn't get bad
               | again until the shoe bomber.
        
               | chrsig wrote:
               | don't forget a high likelyhood of being irradiated
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | Not that I like the millimeter wave scanners, but like
               | the metal detectors I think they use low-energy non-
               | ionizing radiation, so its not really a change in the
               | kind or significance of radiation exposure.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Conventional metal detectors use electromagnets and don't
               | emit any ionizing radiation. Backscatter scanners used in
               | airport security screening do emit ionizing radiation but
               | a very small amount.
               | 
               | https://www.epa.gov/radtown/radiation-and-airport-
               | security-s...
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | You get more radiation in the plane than from TSA.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Clear doesn't get you past the checkpoints, it just gets
               | you to the front of the line. Gross on a "class warfare"
               | level, but you go through the same security everyone else
               | does.
               | 
               | Now, TSA PreCheck allows you to bypass some of the stuff,
               | like shoe removal and taking laptops out of your bag, but
               | it's coupled with a background check.
        
           | Tagbert wrote:
           | So these are made for one priority: " Each UnMask is made of
           | two layers of premium ultralight material that are chosen for
           | their incredible breathability and comfort. "
        
           | aerovistae wrote:
           | Just bought one. Hoping it lives up to its marketing and I
           | can enjoy a flight on an airplane without discomfort.
           | 
           | I'm triple-vaccinated and absolutely sick of wearing a mask.
           | I agreed with it for the first 18+ months of this but by now
           | I'm just no longer in favor. I no longer believe covid will
           | eventually "go away" and am certainly not in favor of wearing
           | masks for years to come in the hopes that it does.
           | 
           | Those that remain unvaccinated by choice I don't care about.
           | Those who have vulnerable immune systems I have sympathy for
           | but ultimately I don't feel all of society can wear masks
           | forever on basis of their existence. Especially now that it's
           | such a widespread virus that it's basically unavoidable
           | without being a hermit.
        
             | edgyquant wrote:
             | This is how I feel as well, and it seems to be a growing
             | sentiment among liberals who supported the masks and
             | lockdowns for the first year or so.
        
             | tombert wrote:
             | Everyone in my family (including me) is vaccinated and
             | boosted, but they all (except me somehow) still got COVID
             | during December, with my mom getting especially sick.
             | Fortunately they all recovered and are fine now (I think
             | largely due to the vaccine), but I feel like there exists
             | an alternate universe where my mom dies despite being
             | vaccinated.
             | 
             | Because of this, I don't think the "fuck the unvaccinated,
             | I am sick of masks" mantra works; people can still get
             | pretty sick even after being responsible and getting
             | vaccinated, and I think as a result the mask mandates might
             | need to stay. I don't like them either, but I like people
             | getting sick even less.
             | 
             | NOTE:
             | 
             | Just to be 100% clear: I am very very very much _not_ anti-
             | vax. Please get vaccinated.
        
             | TameAntelope wrote:
             | The amount of time you spent trying to keep others safe is
             | washed down the drain when you give up for no reason other
             | than you're tired.
        
               | sfotm wrote:
               | This isn't really true, regardless of whether you like
               | masks or not. There have been one or two level changes
               | with respect to how much risk you're introducing to those
               | around you as well as the personal accountability of
               | those you'd affect. It's not surprising that different
               | people have different tolerances for these risks.
               | 
               | Even without the above factored in, this is sort of like
               | saying that not using your turn signals in traffic on the
               | 100th turn nullifies their utility for the previous 99
               | (not a perfect analogy).
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | It's not about individual risk, it's about collective
               | risk, and honestly it's quite selfish to consider the
               | COVID risks only with regard to yourself.
               | 
               | And Omicron has made it so the risk profile is
               | effectively the same as when this pandemic started; you
               | _will_ get it, you _will_ be contagious for a time, and
               | you _will_ infect others.
               | 
               | By looking at that risk and accepting it, you're throwing
               | away the work you've previously put in to avoid being a
               | bad person.
        
               | sfotm wrote:
               | The risk profiles that I refer to are both collective and
               | individual - they're correlated for pretty clear reasons.
               | Nobody is experiencing the spread of the disease in a
               | vacuum.
               | 
               | Omicron's risk profile doesn't seem to be the same,
               | looking at the numbers available on the Google chart I
               | look at. We're seeing a lot fewer deaths per cases.
               | That's not to say everyone should throw caution to the
               | wind and do whatever they want, but it's disingenuous to
               | say the math hasn't changed at all.
               | 
               | COVID cases are acting like a marketplace. People take
               | different actions when the numbers/unknowns change, and
               | that's not surprising. I know I'm doing a lot more
               | outside of the home than I was when COVID first started,
               | and that I'm not unique in that respect _at all_.
               | 
               | Not prescribing any course of action, just tossing out
               | what I've been seeing.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Omicron may only be less deadly _because_ of the
               | precautions we 're currently taking. Reducing those
               | precautions could very well slingshot Omicron into being
               | the deadliest variant, if it isn't already by sheer
               | numbers.
        
               | jimmaswell wrote:
               | > And Omicron has made it so the risk profile is
               | effectively the same as when this pandemic started; you
               | will get it, you will be contagious for a time, and you
               | will infect others.
               | 
               | Total nonsense. Anyone's chance of dying is massively
               | diminished with the vaccine.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Dying isn't the only bad thing that can happen to you if
               | you contract SARS-CoV-19, and it's not just about you.
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Many respiratory viruses have "long" symptoms. Covid is
               | not even close to unique in that regard. Should we shut
               | down everything and force little kids to wear masks for 8
               | hours a day for the annual flu?
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Yes, if those other viruses are as contagious,
               | widespread, and deadly as SARS-CoV-2.
               | 
               | Luckily, nothing else has reached that level. Yet.
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | > It's not about individual risk, it's about collective
               | risk, and honestly it's quite selfish to consider the
               | COVID risks only with regard to yourself.
               | 
               | Is it wrong to be selfish? That seems be an implicit
               | assumption in your argument.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Yes, it's wrong to be so selfish that you can't
               | experience a minor inconvenience to mitigate the risk of
               | causing another person's death or severe injury.
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | More assumptions:
               | 
               | 1. Should people have the expectation that they can
               | inconvenience others, even if only in minor ways? This is
               | taken as given, but it's not always the case. For
               | instance, reducing speed limits everywhere would only
               | slightly inconvenience everyone but save thousands of
               | lives.
               | 
               | 2. Is it a minor inconvenience? Certainly not to some
               | people with breathing difficulties.
               | 
               | 3. Does it really mitigate the risk to the degree you
               | imply? The case is frankly not as solid as you suggest.
               | 
               | There are even more, but frankly the case is flimsy
               | enough as it is.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
        
         | azangru wrote:
         | > after coming back from winter break, the schools started
         | mandating masks outside as well as in
         | 
         | While the effectiveness of masks at schools indoors is
         | questionable, is there any evidence at all for using, let alone
         | mandating masks outside? I would have thought that the sheer
         | volume and circulation of fresh air should dilute viral
         | particles below the infectious concentration. What are they
         | protecting against: direct sneezing into someone else's face?
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | > What are they protecting against: direct sneezing into
           | someone else's face?
           | 
           | You'd be surprised how often this happens at an elementary
           | school!
        
           | bastardoperator wrote:
           | If you have children you know the answer to this question:
           | What are they protecting against: direct sneezing into
           | someone else's face?
           | 
           | Yes. Coughing, sneezing, touching, hugging, biting,
           | scratching, and not washing hands. If you want to get sick on
           | a semi regular basis, children are the way to go.
        
         | siquick wrote:
         | I've found N95 masks to be far more breathable than the normal
         | paper masks, and definitely more breathable than cloth masks.
        
           | dec0dedab0de wrote:
           | do you mean N95 masks with a valve? If so I agree, but the
           | ones without a valve are way more difficult to breath in,
           | that is kind of the point.
        
             | CorrectHorseBat wrote:
             | Cloth masks get wet after a while which makes it hard to
             | breathe, N95 masks (with or without valve) don't.
        
             | dv_dt wrote:
             | I think they are talking as compared to cloth or surgical
             | masks - and I would agree that the n95 class of masks are
             | relatively easier to breathe in (and also reusable).
        
             | phil21 wrote:
             | The 3M Aura+ line is by far the easiest mask (including
             | cloth) I've used, and coincidentally it gives me the best
             | seal.
             | 
             | I don't use them often, just in high risk situations - but
             | they pass the glasses fog test among other things, and I
             | can't tell I'm wearing it after about 15 minutes. All other
             | masks annoy me.
             | 
             | YMMV but it really surprised me as I hate the "surgical
             | style" 3M N95's, these "duckbill" design masks are quite
             | comfortable and breathable in comparison.
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | The article is right that generic "masks" don't work well enough
       | to see the effect. But N95 respirator masks do and we should all
       | be wearing them if indoors in public for long periods.
       | 
       | Well fit N95 (or better) respirators are needed in schools. Not
       | just "masks". Unfortunately this does imply that very young
       | children cannot be effectively masked because they will seriously
       | degrade the protection by not maintining fit and seal. That is if
       | the N95 respirator masks fit their small faces well enough to
       | seal at all. This isn't an all or nothing issue though. Even a
       | badly or intermittently fit N95 on a young childs face will
       | protect more than a strap of cloth.
       | 
       | The CDC (and other institutions) not only failed on mask
       | messaging, they actively told people the wrong things for months
       | and then years. But it's pretty obvious from first principles.
       | It's aerosol spread so you need to actually filter the air, not
       | just block spittle.
        
         | mshroyer wrote:
         | There's no such thing as a child-sized N95 because N95 is an
         | occupational standard, not a general population standard like
         | KF94.
        
       | endisneigh wrote:
       | I don't get it - at this point vaccinations are available for
       | anyone school aged.
       | 
       | There's no more need for masks. Vaccinate if you want, or don't.
       | If you get sick, or not, that's on you.
       | 
       | It's the same deal with a lot of other illnesses- you vaccinate
       | or take the risk. It's been this way for decades in schools.
       | 
       | Disclosure: triple vaxx'd moderna
        
       | jmull wrote:
       | Hm... this does not actually make an argument against masks in
       | school.
       | 
       | It's perfectly fair to point out the limitations of the available
       | studies. Of course we want better ones -- that's a good argument
       | for more, better studies. But the lack of absolute proof isn't an
       | argument against masks in school. That's dumb. Until we conduct
       | some well-designed rigorous controlled experiments on human
       | children (which we'll never do, for presumably obvious reasons)
       | we are going to have to make decisions with imperfect knowledge.
       | 
       | There is substantial evidence that a properly worn N95 or KN95
       | mask reduces the transmission of covid, right?
       | 
       | Can children be swayed/educated/convinced to wear a quality mask
       | often enough to make a difference in the transmission of covid
       | among their teachers or their families? IDK. Good question. We
       | aren't completely sure, but probably.
       | 
       | Maybe we should answer that before killing masks in school. I
       | mean... let's not be dumb, right?
       | 
       | Masks aren't exactly burdensome. We make kids wear shirts and
       | shoes, even when it's unnecessary in summer. Given the current
       | situation, if you could magically set aside politics and the
       | associated mouth-breathers (which of course we can't) wouldn't we
       | actually demand proof that masks are a net negative before we
       | stop mandating them?
       | 
       | To me, this is a question of how much do we allow "dumb" to run
       | the way things are. Apparently, it's quite a lot. I'm curious how
       | far down we'll go before the end?
        
         | plandis wrote:
         | > But the lack of absolute proof isn't an argument against
         | masks in school. That's dumb.
         | 
         | How so? It seems more ignorant to assume that masks would help
         | more when the data we do have doesn't show that.
         | 
         | > Can children be swayed/educated/convinced to wear a quality
         | mask often enough to make a difference in the transmission of
         | covid among their teachers or their families? IDK. Good
         | question. We aren't completely sure, but probably.
         | 
         | You call the authors ideas dumb, but then yourself make
         | unfounded inferences as an argument for continuing to require
         | masks in schools.
        
           | jmull wrote:
           | Come on. The problem is the studies aren't conclusive, not
           | that they show nothing.
           | 
           | Jesus.
           | 
           | Sorry, but yes, arguing that away is dumb. Not just dumb, but
           | it gets people dead. So... good for you?
           | 
           | Look at the way the article hand-waves away the Bangladesh
           | study... that only makes sense if children transmit covid in
           | a substantially different way than adults. What's the
           | justification for that? Our model for covid transmission is
           | by droplets, particularly from the mouth, such as when
           | exclaiming, shouting, etc. and that masks inhibit such
           | transmission by catching the droplets. Without some evidence
           | it's hard to conceive of how children would be less prone to
           | this, making mask-wearing more important for them to reduce
           | transmission.
           | 
           | > unfounded inferences
           | 
           | What's your argument? That children probably cannot be
           | educated to do anything whatsoever? Hey, schools are
           | pointless in their entirety, so we can cancel all that and
           | the mask issue goes away naturally. Dumb.
        
         | adamrezich wrote:
         | > Masks aren't exactly burdensome. We make kids wear shirts and
         | shoes, even when it's unnecessary in summer. Given the current
         | situation, if you could magically set aside politics and the
         | associated mouth-breathers (which of course we can't) wouldn't
         | we actually demand proof that masks are a net negative before
         | we stop mandating them?
         | 
         | normally you're supposed to actually demand proof that
         | something is a net positive _before_ you _start_ mandating it,
         | instead of saying  "it's not exactly burdensome, why not?", and
         | then going ahead and doing it.
         | 
         | shirts and shoes don't obscure faces, which are used to
         | communicate nonverbally. one of the main advantages of
         | public/private schooling over homeschooling (though there's
         | obviously ways to mitigate this for homeschoolers) is the
         | social interactions between children are valuable in teaching
         | them basic social skills more or less organically.
         | 
         | you have to stop and think about nth-order effects when making
         | broad sweeping authoritarianesque mandates like this, it's
         | _never_ as simple as,  "well, they have to wear shirts and
         | shoes to school don't they? how are masks any different?"
        
           | jmull wrote:
           | > normally you're supposed to actually demand proof that
           | something is a net positive before you start mandating it
           | 
           | Are you unaware of the massive amounts of clear-cut evidence
           | that properly worn quality masks substantially reduce the
           | transmission of covid? Come on.
        
             | adamrezich wrote:
             | as other comments have said, why are we so obsessed with
             | minimizing transmission as much as possible, seemingly
             | regardless of cost or any other incidental negative
             | outcomes, _at this point in time?_ these are all things
             | that made sense early on when we didn 't know much and
             | everyone was kind of panicky and the death counts were
             | higher and the misinformation from China was prevalent.
             | 
             | but now in twenty twenty two, we can't just mandating
             | things in order to reduce transmission of a respiratory
             | virus, without considering what other nth-order effects
             | said mandates will have. it's pure irresponsibility as the
             | result of prescribed dogma.
        
       | docfort wrote:
       | This argument is poorly constructed. I think there could be
       | better ones, but here's my problem. It goes through the three CDC
       | studies and correctly observes that they fail to separate regions
       | that have high vaccination rates from schools without a mask
       | mandate. Indeed, the ideal experiment would involve two schools
       | that are otherwise identical in the same geographical area with
       | high vaccination rates: one that has no mask policy, and one that
       | has mandatory masking. The article essentially complains that
       | such an experiment has yet to be done, so therefore, the
       | universal masking recommendation is unfounded.
       | 
       | It is empirical fact that vaccination rates on a county by county
       | is strongly predicted by the overall political alignment of a
       | county (not implying anything further). It is also empirical fact
       | that mask mandates are also correlated in a similar way. It is
       | also fact that COVID-19 is an airborne disease.
       | 
       | The first two facts determine that the ideal experiment cannot
       | accidentally occur in the United States. The last fact precludes
       | an intentional experiment ethically. But the last fact at least
       | makes the masking recommendation reasonable.
       | 
       | I think the political correlation with these two variables
       | (masking and vaccination) is a confounding variable. It would be
       | very preferable for it be otherwise, but complaining that it is
       | so while not seriously engaging with the real situation is a poor
       | argument.
        
         | JangoSteve wrote:
         | There's another problem with the article's argument. It
         | contends that the many studies on mask effectiveness have
         | various shortcomings such as not being specific to kids, or
         | having vaccination rates as a confounding variable. And
         | therefore, we should not have mask mandates (despite the
         | evidence that they work, however non-specific to school
         | children they may be).
         | 
         | But its reason for concluding that children should _not_ wear
         | masks is because of all of these issues that themselves aren 't
         | well studied or understood by the article's own admission:
         | 
         | > Despite how widespread all-day masking of children in school
         | is, the short-term and long-term consequences of this practice
         | are not well understood, in part because no one has
         | successfully collected large-scale systematic data and few
         | researchers have tried.
         | 
         | Why in this case should the serious lack of evidence for the
         | risks of masking children outweigh the greater-but-imperfect
         | evidence for the risks of increased transmission of Covid by
         | not masking children? It seems like a double-standard allowing
         | the author to arrive at their desired conclusion.
        
         | Izkata wrote:
         | From what I've been hearing, there are private schools not
         | implementing masks mandates in the same areas as public schools
         | that are. Those might be good places to look.
        
         | aeternum wrote:
         | A randomized study was run in Bangladesh. There they handed out
         | masks to randomly selected villages among a pool of 600
         | villages with similar vaccination and political stances.
         | 
         | That study showed that the effect of surgical masks was
         | statistically significant when used by the elderly 50+
         | population. For other age groups and for cloth masks, the
         | advantage was statistically insignificant.
         | 
         | All the headlines around this study, including from the CDC
         | were basically 'Masks proven to be effective!', 'masks work!',
         | but that's a very lax definition of effective.
         | 
         | https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/09/masks-rand...
        
           | JangoSteve wrote:
           | Saying the effects of masking on younger age groups and with
           | cloth masks in this study were statistically insignificant is
           | also a misrepresentation of what the study found. The actual
           | paper itself can be downloaded here:
           | 
           | https://www.poverty-action.org/publication/impact-
           | community-...
           | 
           | From the paper:                   We found clear evidence
           | that surgical masks are effective in reducing symptomatic
           | seropreva-         lence of SARS-CoV-2. While cloth masks
           | clearly reduce symptoms, we find less clear evidence of
           | their impact on symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, with the
           | statistical significance depending         on whether we
           | impute missing values for non-consenting adults. The number
           | of cloth mask vil-         lages (100) was half that for
           | surgical masks (200), meaning that our results tend to be
           | less precise.
           | 
           | They're talking about the analysis of the sub-group that
           | consented to blood tests for Covid antibodies through the
           | trial, and the fact that a smaller group of people (which
           | could also be a confounding factor) consented to these, but
           | that if they assume the non-consenting participants had
           | similar rates of infection as the consenting group (instead
           | of throwing them out), that the advantage becomes more
           | pronounced even for cloth masks.
           | 
           | Furthermore, they said that even without that consideration,
           | the cloth masks still reduced symptoms of Covid, which is
           | still a great win for masks, as it seems they reduce the
           | viral load received by an individual enough to reduce the
           | severity of their infection. So saying the overall advantage
           | of masks was statistically insignificant isn't really true.
           | 
           | What the trial really found was indeed that masks seem to
           | work, and surgical masks work better than cloth masks. This
           | aligns with what many other studies have found as well.
           | However, even though that's probably a valid inference to
           | draw from the data collected in the trial, it's not really
           | what the trial was designed to find, which was more
           | specifically that if you actively distribute masks to people
           | and encourage them to be worn, then more people will indeed
           | wear them, and this in turn seems to have a positive effect
           | on reducing both the transmission and severity of Covid.
        
             | aeternum wrote:
             | The question is how effective masks are w.r.t. Covid. For
             | this the test really needs to be seroprevalence, not just
             | symptoms. Symptoms can be caused by many non-Covid causes
             | like allergies or the common cold.
             | 
             | The researchers state:
             | 
             | > We selected the WHO case definition of COVID-19 for its
             | sensitivity, though its limited specificity may imply that
             | the impact of masks on symptoms comes partly from non-SARS-
             | CoV-2 respiratory infections
        
           | jmull wrote:
           | Teachers are the "50+ population" in schools, right?
           | 
           | I never know what to make of posts like this. It seems almost
           | insulting to have to explicitly point out that masks are
           | about reducing transmission, and that transmission could
           | occur between students (not 50+) and teachers (many 50+).
           | 
           | Right?
           | 
           | So your conclusion should be that the Bangladesh study is
           | quite relevant to schools, yet you seem to be suggesting the
           | opposite?
           | 
           | Though I knew about it, I don't think I really appreciated
           | how people could cherry-pick information to fit their
           | preconceived ideas until covid.
        
       | tehjoker wrote:
       | It's going to be darkly funny when all the people that thought
       | infecting kids constantly was a good idea start to have to cope
       | with the social and biological consequences of it for decades.
        
         | DaltonCoffee wrote:
         | Curious what you feel the biological consequences of in-school
         | covid transmission will be decades from now.
        
         | standardUser wrote:
         | What you are suggesting is wildly speculative and not backed up
         | by the science. Individuals not in high-risk groups nearly
         | always make a full recovery from COVID infections.
        
       | usefulcat wrote:
       | The article talks a lot about how there's little or no evidence
       | showing benefits of masking for kids, and also talks a lot about
       | the unknown long-term effects of masking on kids. However, as
       | with so many articles trying to make a point or persuade people,
       | it barely mentions at all the unknown long-term effects of covid.
       | 
       | I'm willing to be persuaded by evidence, but (for me) any piece
       | that fails to address such an obvious counterpoint immediately
       | loses a great deal of credibility.
        
         | nradov wrote:
         | That's a non sequitur. Forcing children to wear masks in
         | schools won't prevent them from being exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
         | The virus is highly contagious and can never be eradicated, so
         | just because there might be some long-term effects for a
         | minority of patients (as with any viral infection) that's not a
         | valid reason to continue mask mandates.
         | 
         | We obviously can't expect healthy children to wear masks
         | forever. That would be absurd and dystopian. So what are the
         | exit criteria?
        
         | christkv wrote:
         | If you have small children you know what joke masks are in
         | school. Little kids are not responsible adults. They touch
         | their face, take their masks on and off, exchange them with
         | their friends and even eat them.
         | 
         | Pretending that masks on young kids contribute anything to
         | slowing the spread is complete wishful thinking.
        
           | DarylZero wrote:
           | Hell, quite a few adults do that stuff.
        
           | wvenable wrote:
           | And yet my impression of slightly older children and teens
           | (admittedly in Canada) is that they're better and more
           | consistent at mask wearing than adults are. My son couldn't
           | care less if he's wearing a mask or not -- heck I think he
           | hates wearing socks more.
           | 
           | I wonder how much of these breathless articles against
           | masking children is more about adults than about the
           | children.
        
           | rob74 wrote:
           | Well, if you have elderly parents you will also learn a thing
           | or five about mask-wearing discipline. They will do all of
           | the things above (except maybe eating them). My personal
           | favorite: removing the mask when they have to cough. And even
           | in the in-between age groups, the "responsible adults" are
           | fewer than you might think...
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | jpthurman wrote:
           | I second this. The article mentions how dubious it is that
           | kids can wear their masks properly. I'll site my own son who
           | routinely pulls his down below his mouth and nose. I can
           | imagine the stress on teachers who have to keep up
           | appearances that masks are being enforced while also watching
           | the kids in their class do anything but keep them on in an
           | effective manner.
        
             | scionthefly wrote:
             | About 50% wear masks correctly when it's mandated.
             | Correcting them works for 30s to 5 min.
        
         | xorcist wrote:
         | Demanding evidence of things we know nothing about in order to
         | consider evidence of things we do know about is a rather tall
         | order, even theoretically speaking.
        
         | me_me_me wrote:
         | This is actually a thing I had my mind changed almost
         | immediately upon hearing argument for primary and early
         | secondary schools.
         | 
         | Children need facial expressions to read the emotions of
         | teachers/peers and are important part of their development. So
         | forcing them to wear mask impede that part of development. Now
         | its up to you to decide whats more important.
         | 
         | Just to support the point. There are videos of mother
         | interacting with a very toddler everything normal, then she is
         | told to hold steady and neural face all the time. The baby
         | quickly notices and becomes increasingly distressed.
        
         | dennis_moore wrote:
         | You wouldn't expect an article that talks about the long-term
         | effects of COVID to also address the downsides of mask and
         | restrictions, so why should the opposite be true? You can read
         | independent arguments for both sides of the issue, judge their
         | strengths and weaknesses, and then make up your own mind.
        
           | gms7777 wrote:
           | > You wouldn't expect an article that talks about the long-
           | term effects of COVID to also address the downsides of mask
           | and restrictions
           | 
           | The parallel of this example would be an article discussing
           | the evidence for the effectiveness of masking, in which case
           | you would be right -- discussion of long-term effects of
           | COVID wouldn't be necessarily relevant.
           | 
           | But that isn't this article -- this article is discussing
           | policy: should students mask in schools? In which case,
           | weighing the long-term effects of covid is absolutely
           | relevant.
        
             | colechristensen wrote:
             | The built in assumption is that you can stop it. Yup,
             | masking usually slows down infection rates but when you
             | roll those dice every day with a very infectious variant it
             | doesn't matter. If the hospitals aren't full what
             | difference have you made if everybody gets it over the
             | course of two months instead of two weeks? (And hospitals
             | aren't full of children, the peak is past, so we're
             | definitely solidly entering "what's the point" territory)
        
         | endymi0n wrote:
         | While your point is spot on, it probably won't matter in the
         | long run. With the infection rate of Omicron, we as a society
         | were faced between even more ridiculously restrictive measures
         | to contain it after the first economy destroying measures -- or
         | just taking the jump into the unknown unknown of what will
         | happen if we let everyone get infected and move into the
         | endemic state.
         | 
         | With probably only the exception of China, most countries have
         | decided that they will take the latter path, at various degrees
         | of throttling.
        
           | lambdaba wrote:
           | That's assuming we're containing it at all. This all seems
           | very hubristic to me, but I just wanted to point out the
           | assumption. It's not because we do things that burden us to a
           | degree that the virus' spread is also burdened to the same
           | degree. I feel that this is an unconscious assumption that's
           | made in this discussion.
        
             | colechristensen wrote:
             | We're not, people are pretending that we are or still have
             | the opportunity.
             | 
             | Most of the US is at or past the omicron peak, it stopped
             | growing because it's running out of people to infect. The
             | more cautious people will make up a long fat tail, but it
             | really seems doubtful that anything can be done.
             | 
             | We've had 72 million _detected_ cases in the US, if you
             | assume a certain number didn't test and a big number never
             | knew they had it at all... we are really running out of
             | people to "save" from covid infections. During the national
             | peak, there were something like a million infections a day.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | The CDC estimated that we're only detecting about a
               | quarter of actual cases.
               | 
               | https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-
               | updates/burd...
               | 
               | In Santa Clara County CA wastewater monitoring data
               | indicates that we're past the peak Omicron wave.
               | 
               | https://covid19.sccgov.org/dashboard-wastewater
        
         | restingrobot wrote:
         | >there's little or no evidence showing benefits of masking for
         | kids,
         | 
         | If the masks don't prevent the spread of COVID, or reduce the
         | likelihood of having symptomatic illness, then the long term
         | effects of COVID don't matter in regards to masking arguments.
        
         | rhino369 wrote:
         | If there is little to no evidence that it reduces spread
         | amongst children, the effects of covid on children is
         | irrelevant. You wouldn't say an article shitting on Ivermectin
         | effacy failed to take into account Long COVID.
         | 
         | The article doesn't mention the other uncomfortable truth--
         | every kid is getting covid sooner rather than later regardless
         | of mask mandates. Even if masks are 50% effective at reducing
         | the spread, Omicron variant is more contagious with a mask than
         | the original variant was without one. And there is little
         | reason to believe masks reduce 50% of spread.
         | 
         | Washington DC infection rate 20X'd in a month. Even if you
         | reduce the slope of the curve, the area under it is going to be
         | roughly the same.
        
         | kenjackson wrote:
         | The article also seems to contradict itself. It notes that
         | there are negatives to mask wearing in terms of lip reading and
         | clarity of voice, but the people in class that talk the most
         | are the teachers, and they seem to show the most benefit from
         | wearing masks. At least at my child's school, children don't
         | have to wear masks at lunch and recess (which are held
         | outside). This is when children mostly communicate with each
         | other.
         | 
         | That said, the most compelling reason to get rid of mask
         | mandates in the school is that they don't work. Kids wear them
         | all over their face. As noted in the article, no one wears good
         | ones, and no one wears them close to correctly. Part of the
         | reason why I suspect we see evidence that teachers masking up
         | is effective while children aren't effective is that teachers
         | are more likely to wear their masks correctly.
        
         | kart23 wrote:
         | Thats not what the article is about. The article is showing the
         | lack of evidence for masks at schools. If transmission isn't
         | impacted by masks, then the severity of covid has nothing to do
         | with the decision of whether to require masks or not.
        
           | teepark wrote:
           | But while it points out that the evidence for masks being
           | effective is scarce, it does little to identify positive
           | evidence that masks are specifically _ineffective_. So we
           | just don 't know as much as CDC's consistent guidelines seem
           | to suggest, and it makes sense to weigh the risk. That the
           | article neglects to frame it in this light highlights the
           | one-sided nature.
        
             | a9h74j wrote:
             | In terms of weighing risk, find one IRB anywhere which
             | would have approved an experiment to mask all of the
             | students in a school district for a year.
        
             | sjg007 wrote:
             | There is plenty of evidence that masks work.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | There is plenty of evidence that high quality, well
               | fitted masks (N95 or equivalent) work in the sense of
               | reducing the risk of transmission in any single close
               | contact interaction. But so what? The virus is here to
               | stay and can never be eradicated. Obviously people aren't
               | going to spend the rest of their lives wearing masks. In
               | fact outside the HN bubble in many areas people have
               | already stopped. We're all going to be exposed multiple
               | times throughout our lives no matter what. Masks can only
               | slightly delay that at best.
               | 
               | Instead of fighting a futile battle by trying to prevent
               | exposure we should instead accept that everyone will be
               | exposed and try to maximize their odds of survival. That
               | means encouraging eligible people to get vaccinated, and
               | take other steps to mitigate co-morbid conditions.
               | 
               | https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/vinay-prasad/94646
        
               | CrazyPyroLinux wrote:
               | [citation needed] Studies that don't use a model or beg
               | the question? The Danish one that shows 3% effectiveness?
               | Or the Bangladesh one that shows 11%?
        
               | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
               | https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/masks-protect-
               | sch...
               | 
               | Also the minor detail that countries with masking
               | cultures - like Japan - have relatively excellent Covid
               | stats with minimal deaths.
               | 
               | Honestly, we're through the looking glass if we're even
               | pretending there's any kind of debate about this.
               | 
               | Masks work for adults. Period. There are tens of papers
               | proving that now. Any good faith web search will find
               | them. For every cherry picked paper "proving" they don't
               | there are ten much better designed studies proving they
               | do.
               | 
               | If masks work for adults, they work for kids - not just
               | to cut spread between kids, but also between kids and
               | adults, and especially between kids and vulnerable
               | adults.
               | 
               | The UK has decided to have an outbreak of political
               | psychosis over this, and there are already significant -
               | double digit - percentages of both teachers and kids off
               | sick with Covid in many schools.
               | 
               | Risks to kids are relatively insignificant compared to
               | the trauma of lost school friends, lost hours from
               | school, lost relatives and - in too many cases - lost
               | parents.
               | 
               | The promotion of irrational and human-hostile anti-masker
               | anti-vaxxer nonsense _really_ needs to stop.
        
               | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
               | I'm not sure how "we're through the looking glass"
               | because there is still debate on the issue, the Atlantic
               | article lays out pretty strong evidence to suggest there
               | is at the very least still plenty of room for debate.
               | Further I don't understand how debating issues is "human-
               | hostile" as you put it. All public measures should
               | continuously be up for debate.
        
       | rkk3 wrote:
       | have a vaccinated 5 year-old and really frustrated that her &
       | other kids in an overwhelmingly vaccinated & non-english language
       | immigrant community, have to wear masks all day at school. The
       | impact to speech, language & general development just seems so
       | overwhelming compared against the potential benefit of children
       | wearing a mask.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | friendlydog wrote:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20220127154033/https://www.theat...
        
       | throwaway22032 wrote:
       | The case against masks is quite trivial and generalizable across
       | most industries.
       | 
       | Today, a teacher now has two realistic options:
       | 
       | a) self-isolate indefinitely, either teaching remotely or
       | quitting their job
       | 
       | b) contract coronavirus at some point
       | 
       | Given that, masks are an irrelevance. A teacher who is clinically
       | vulnerable and unwilling to roll the dice is left only with the
       | option to quit their job, regardless of whether masks are used,
       | or windows are left open, or whatever else.
       | 
       | Coronavirus is too contagious for any sort of avoidance strategy
       | to actually work. It's not like, say, cooking chicken, in which
       | you can basically solve food poisoning.
        
         | wonderwonder wrote:
         | My kids school district did not require masks but highly
         | recommended them. I figured I would send the kids to school
         | with masks as I did not want to be disrespectful to their
         | teachers who I assumed would be masked out of concern with
         | being around so many children all day. None of their teachers
         | wore masks, so that was the end of that. Essentially 15% of
         | people including teachers and students wear masks. None of the
         | adults (school staff) in their on campus after school program
         | are masked either.
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | Do you know what the positivity rate is of your school
           | population?
           | 
           | Our school requires masks at all times on campus, inside or
           | outside, vaccinated or not (we're in California). However,
           | prior to omicron we had 0 cases (school has about 500 people
           | at it teachers+staff+kids). With Omicron we've only had 37
           | cases.
        
             | wonderwonder wrote:
             | Official numbers say we have 10 active cases and 35 total
             | for the year in my kids elementary school which has ~750
             | people on campus. My kid is one of those positive cases so
             | he is quarantined for 10 days. Keeping my youngest home as
             | well just to be sure he does not infect anyone, just
             | assuming he is positive as well but no symptoms. They go to
             | the same school. Prior to omicron I think they only had 5
             | positive cases at the school, no masks during delta either.
             | At this point just assumed that if no one else is masking,
             | there is no point and the kids are not going to keep them
             | on if the teachers don't make them or wear them themselves.
             | Assuming wife and I have it currently as well as we are not
             | isolating from our kid but no symptoms. Wife and I are just
             | working from home to avoid infecting anyone at work.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | wrycoder wrote:
         | C) Take a COVID therapeutic and get well.
         | 
         | If only the powers that be would take that approach.
        
         | nkrisc wrote:
         | The point of masking and being cautious at this point is not to
         | avoid ever catching COVID, because it seems certain now that
         | everyone will catch it at some point. The point is to be the
         | _last_ person to catch it when hospitals are at normal capacity
         | and everything else is back to normal, just in case you happen
         | to have a very poor reaction to it.
         | 
         | It also just sounds kind of miserable. I also avoid catching
         | the flu as much as possible. And if I ever go back to commuting
         | by train, I'll probably wear masks on the train too. I used to
         | get colds all the time just from riding a completely packed
         | train with sick people coughing and sneezing all over.
        
           | DeWilde wrote:
           | Sterilizing your environment might be actually
           | counterproductive for your immune system. A better strategy
           | is eat more healthy and do moderate exercises, especially
           | during flu season.
           | 
           | Eventually you will come in to contact with a virus, unless
           | you plan to remove all contact with people and animals.
        
             | nkrisc wrote:
             | Who's talking about sterilizing their environment? Reply to
             | wrong comment?
             | 
             | Of course I'll get sick, I've had the cold a few times this
             | year already. That doesn't mean I _try_ to get sick. Don 't
             | you wash your hands?
             | 
             | Wearing a mask on a crowded train with people sneezing and
             | coughing seems pretty rational to me. I don't _like_
             | catching a cold and will take reasonable measures to avoid
             | it. Wearing a mask for an hour is hardly a big deal.
        
             | graeme wrote:
             | This is unlikely to be true for respiratory viruses.
             | Compared to an ancestral environment, we have:
             | 
             | * Much less contact with bacteria, dirt, allergens, due to
             | sterilization
             | 
             | * Much more contact with respiratory viruses, due to
             | enclosed spaces and modern energy efficiency standards
             | 
             | The whole overactive immune system/hygiene hypothesis is
             | much more likely linked to lack of exposure to the first
             | group of pathogens and substances.
        
             | TameAntelope wrote:
             | But that's the trick; I can _temporarily_ remove all
             | contact with people and animals, while there 's an active
             | deadly virus killing astronomically large numbers of people
             | in my country.
             | 
             | Will I need to be like this forever? No. Can I be like this
             | for another year or so? Yes. It's highly unpleasant, but I
             | (and some others like me) can actually isolate to the
             | degree you jokingly suggest.
             | 
             | And why wouldn't I? Because of some primitive need for
             | physical social interaction? Because of my weak will, my
             | inability to place the needs of others before the _totally
             | optional_ needs of my own?
             | 
             | It just seems like anyone who can isolate and doesn't
             | should have a hard time looking themselves in the mirror.
             | It's obviously a different story for those who can't (most
             | people, really).
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Humans aren't robots. There's nothing primitive or
               | optional about the need for physical social interaction.
               | The people who disagree with you aren't wrong, they
               | simply have different subjective priorities and values.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | spookthesunset wrote:
           | In this post-vaccine world we now live in, is slowing the
           | spread of Covid really the absolute most important thing we
           | all need to focus on?
           | 
           | Shouldn't we move on at this point? What is the end goal
           | here? Why are fully vaccinated adults continuing to freak out
           | about Covid?
        
             | davidw wrote:
             | Once again: people are dying, right now, because they can't
             | get access to health care, because hospitals in some places
             | are overflowing with mostly unvaccinated people with COVID.
             | This seems like a fairly location-specific issue, so I
             | would expect that different places could do different
             | things at different times.
             | 
             | We can and are focusing on other things, but hospital
             | capacity is a good one to work on keeping down. Once that's
             | down, I guess we see where we are and probably lift some
             | restrictions.
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Where are people dying because they cannot get access to
               | healthcare?
        
               | davidw wrote:
               | https://healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/news/idaho-activates-
               | cris... - comes to mind. Here where I live in Oregon,
               | during the Delta surge, people were waiting on "elective"
               | surgeries for things like cancer treatment, and the
               | hospital system was pretty clear that some ended up dying
               | because the hospital was overloaded.
        
             | nkrisc wrote:
             | I'm not freaking out. I'm just trying to avoid getting
             | myself and my family sick. Who likes being sick? I'm not
             | living in some underground bunker, just taking basic
             | precautions. It's the same reason I buckle my seatbelt:
             | huge potential upside with negligible downside. So worst
             | case scenario, I accidentally wore a mask I didn't need to
             | wear. Oh no.
             | 
             | I have no reason to believe COIVD would be bad for me. But
             | what if it is? Then I'd rather get sick when things have
             | calmed down and hospitals are at normal capacity.
        
           | rhino369 wrote:
           | >The point is to be the last person to catch it when
           | hospitals are at normal capacity and everything else is back
           | to normal, just in case you happen to have a very poor
           | reaction to it.
           | 
           | By that reasoning you would only wear masks when rates are
           | very high. But a lot of schools require it when case rates
           | are very low.
        
           | rkk3 wrote:
           | > The point of masking and being cautious at this point is
           | not to avoid ever catching COVID, because it seems certain
           | now that everyone will catch it at some point. The point is
           | to be the last person to catch it
           | 
           | Great justification for making 5 year-olds wear masks for 6+
           | hours 5 days a week in school. This makes even more sense for
           | the 5 year old kids that have ESL or Speech Pathology needs.
        
         | restingrobot wrote:
         | There is inconclusive evidence that children are vectors of
         | transmission to teachers. At the very least it is the same as
         | any public gathering. So your "options" would apply to every
         | aspect of life, (Grocery store, restaurant, etc.)
        
           | throwaway22032 wrote:
           | Yes, hence my use of the term "generalizable".
        
             | restingrobot wrote:
             | >generalizable across most industries.
             | 
             | I was trying to point out that it is not just industries,
             | its literally life. This is anecdotal, but many of the
             | teachers I personally know are anti-in person learning, but
             | still willing to eat out a restaurant, which makes me
             | question their true motives for remote learning.
        
               | throwaway22032 wrote:
               | Ah, yes, I agree.
               | 
               | My eyes tend to glaze over whenever I hear "because
               | covid" now, it's devoid of meaning and simply means "I
               | don't want to" most of the time.
        
         | zemvpferreira wrote:
         | I mix in society, wear masks everywhere, and have yet to
         | contract coronavirus.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | JasonFruit wrote:
           | c) get lucky
        
             | mandmandam wrote:
             | Statistically speaking, isn't that just normal luck? Aren't
             | 80% or so of infections mild to symptom free?
        
           | mdorazio wrote:
           | You have _yet_ to get coronavirus. There's a pretty good
           | chance that you will before the year is out. Omicron is
           | extremely infectious even among the fully vaccinated. For
           | example, among my friends group all of us are fully
           | vaccinated and boosted, and so far 60% have gotten omicron
           | despite wearing masks in public, washing hands frequently,
           | etc. I expect further mutations in the future will probably
           | happen and similarly reduce vaccine effectiveness in
           | preventing infection.
        
             | Jcampuzano2 wrote:
             | Depending on what test people are getting, there may be a
             | good portion of the population who have gotten Omicron but
             | don't know it if they had very mild symptoms.
             | 
             | Plenty of us have off days, or may feel a little sick but
             | don't assume it is Covid because of expecting extreme
             | reactions even when it absolutely could be due to its
             | symptoms overlapping others and many people being affected
             | very little or even being asymptomatic.
        
           | scatters wrote:
           | How do you know that? Unless you've been taking PCR tests at
           | least weekly, it's more likely that you've had at least one
           | asymptomatic infection.
        
           | throwaway22032 wrote:
           | We're three months in to Omicron and only two years in, your
           | situation right now is irrelevant.
           | 
           | The only way you're getting away with this is either by
           | having some innate immunity, or by simply not noticing you've
           | had it.
           | 
           | I wouldn't have realised if not for a friend saying "get a
           | test", my only symptom was a purple line on a bit of paper. I
           | actually felt better than normal because I went out drinking
           | less.
        
           | naasking wrote:
           | > I mix in society, wear masks everywhere, and have yet to
           | contract coronavirus.
           | 
           | Or you did and were asymptomatic. Something on the order of
           | 70% of cases are largely asymptomatic IIRC. Unless you're
           | claiming you got a PCR test every 21 days since the beginning
           | of the pandemic?
        
             | zemvpferreira wrote:
             | I have not (only a few tests so far) but I'll do you one
             | better. I have a few doctors friends who mix in society,
             | wear masks everywhere, work in covid wards and have yet to
             | contract coronavirus. They have to take an ungodly amount
             | of PCRs.
             | 
             | Point is, a lot of people have been infected so far, but
             | not all people.
        
           | DeWilde wrote:
           | More likely, you've had contact with it but it did not cause
           | any symptoms.
           | 
           | I don't think it is possible to avoid Coronavirus at this
           | point. Unless someone had barricaded themselves in for the
           | past 2 years they are likely to have had contact with the
           | virus at this point.
        
           | restingrobot wrote:
           | You will get COVID at some point, and it won't be because you
           | were careful, you forgot to wear a mask, or you encountered
           | unvaccinated/unmasked people. It will be because this virus
           | is endemic and at some point everyone will get it.
           | 
           | The idea that somehow getting or not getting COVID is due to
           | level of diligence is absurd on its face.
        
           | zdragnar wrote:
           | I've been exposed to covid-positive people multiple times in
           | my home (each time they found out they were positive after),
           | no masking involved.
           | 
           | I get tested after each exposure and have yet to get it
           | either.
           | 
           | Wearing masks and not catching covid is like wearing a
           | bandana and not getting into a bike accident. It is an
           | extremely contagious aerosolized virus that cloth masks
           | simply aren't sufficient to stop.
           | 
           | Meanwhile, the effects of perpetual masking are obvious-
           | harmful to deaf people, harmful to the development of speech
           | and socialization in children, asthmatics and more.
        
             | skrbjc wrote:
             | Funnily enough, I've seen many people riding bikes in the
             | street with no helmet, but wearing a cloth mask.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | I've found myself leaving them on on the walk back to the
               | car a whole lot more now that it's Winter. Zero extra
               | safety, but it keeps the face warm.
        
               | shard wrote:
               | I was already regularly wearing masks in the winter
               | before the pandemic for the same reason, it kept my face
               | nice and warm. Of course it was cloth masks, not N95. But
               | I did wear N95 when the air quality was especially bad.
        
               | mosdave wrote:
               | https://stanfordreview.org/stanford-bicycles-helmets-
               | masks/
        
             | Panther34543 wrote:
             | > Meanwhile, the effects of perpetual masking are obvious-
             | harmful to deaf people, harmful to the development of
             | speech and socialization in children, asthmatics and more.
             | 
             | There's a ton more. I now have tons of facial scars due to
             | continuous breakouts over the past two years due to masks
             | (and, yes, I've spent about $2k trying all sorts of silk
             | and other supposedly "comfortable" masks).
             | 
             | Another thing that hasn't been talked about is cartilage
             | deformities in young children due to the pressure of masks
             | on developing features. My sister is a plastic surgeon and
             | she has talked about this quite a bit, but it hasn't gotten
             | much media attention. The pressure caused by elastic loops
             | around the ear is quite harmful to the correct development
             | of the ear by permanently modifying the cartilage of the
             | concha in growing children[0].
             | 
             | She also mentioned that there may be affects on the shape
             | of the nose if a mask is worn tight enough. A "celestial"
             | nose is a nose shape with an upturned tip, stereotypically
             | considered a sign of attractiveness in many cultures and a
             | common feature of celebrities. It's the most requested
             | shape for those interested in rhinoplasties.
             | 
             | Forcing young children to wear tight masks is quite
             | literally deforming them.
             | 
             | [0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302120
        
               | flycaliguy wrote:
               | My son wears a mask to kindergarten and I've been
               | impressed by just how much it doesn't seem to bother him
               | or really matter at all. That link about deforming ears
               | is interesting! It's funny actually, my family tends to
               | have stuck out "Obama ears" as well call them. Maybe this
               | will create more "ear peers" with the potential to
               | actually increase their hearing capabilities?
        
         | zeku wrote:
         | I still wear my mask to slow the transmission of covid so that
         | less vulnerable people die, and so that our hospitals can stop
         | being overrun.
         | 
         | I also personally think of this as well:
         | https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/27/health/coronavirus-mask-p...
         | 
         | Masking may reduce the severity of your covid infection, which
         | would be pretty sweet.
         | 
         | So it's not an all or nothing.
        
         | damontal wrote:
         | We are all getting coronavirus
        
       | afavour wrote:
       | In a way it's reassuring that people of all political stripes can
       | at least come together on one point: that the CDC has been asleep
       | at the wheel during most of this pandemic. Hopefully at some
       | point there will be a discussion about how to reform the body to
       | be much more proactive.
        
         | comrh wrote:
         | I wish we could all come together and say, "this needs more
         | study" too and admit we might not have enough data to actually
         | make a real decision.
        
         | mr_tristan wrote:
         | The CDC is not so much asleep at the wheel, we just don't have
         | any kind of coherent public health system in the USA. There's
         | basically an independent public health officer for practically
         | every county, and there's very little coordination between them
         | and the CDC.
         | 
         | Michael Lewis' book "The Premonition" is eye-opening to how
         | dysfunctional public health is in the US.
         | 
         | And it's not like he's alone, even the head of the CDC this
         | week called for a reform of the public health system in the US
         | (https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/21/rochelle-
         | walensky-c...). The only picture I'm getting is that the CDC
         | doesn't really feel like they _can_ do anything.
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | I have a mostly positive opinion on the CDC and I wonder if
         | some of the problems are a result of political influence?
         | 
         | The WHO and their fight against the idea that COVID is airborne
         | is even more confusing to me. It felt like they didn't even
         | want the idea discussed.
        
           | aeternum wrote:
           | What gives you a positive opinion of the CDC? By their own
           | admission they have lied to the public multiple times.
           | 
           | That's not something that is indicative of good leadership,
           | even if supposedly done for benevolent reasons.
        
             | criddell wrote:
             | > What gives you a positive opinion of the CDC?
             | 
             | There are a lot of really great people working for the CDC
             | and they are doing some excellent work. They also made some
             | bad decisions around respect to COVID-19 that absolutely
             | does affect their trustworthiness.
             | 
             | However, if I add up the positives and negatives, they
             | still are come out with a net positive rating for me.
             | There's a lot more to the CDC than their COVID response.
        
             | mandmandam wrote:
             | A million times this.
             | 
             | Break it up and scatter it to the four winds. Being heavily
             | taxed for the "privilege" of being lied to is anathema to
             | democracy, even if all the cool politicians, media, fossil
             | fuel and arms companies are doing it.
        
             | JaimeThompson wrote:
             | >By their own admission they have lied to the public
             | multiple times.
             | 
             | Supporting evidence please.
        
               | heartbreak wrote:
               | Good point I'm not sure they ever actually admitted to
               | lying about masks.
        
             | skrbjc wrote:
             | This is one of my main qualms with how public health does
             | their work. Lying is justified if you think it will
             | convince more people to do something that will improve
             | metrics at a population level. Maybe that works for a
             | period of time, but once people find out, it destroys their
             | credibility.
        
           | a9h74j wrote:
           | "When science mixes with politics, what you mostly get is
           | politics."
        
             | criddell wrote:
             | This is an amazing quotation and now I'm reading about John
             | Barry, so thanks for posting it.
        
               | a9h74j wrote:
               | Heard it recently, did not know who to attribute it to.
               | 
               | "when you mix science and politics, you get politics" --
               | John Barry
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | When policies masquerade as science, is nothing but
             | politics.
        
         | rhino369 wrote:
         | The CDC has never balanced risks in any reasonable way. If you
         | listened to the CDC, you wouldn't eat sunny-side up eggs,
         | medium-rare steak, and Prosciutto.
         | 
         | I'm not sure its limited to just the CDC. The entire medical
         | field misapplied basic fluid dynamics for over 50 years and
         | incorrectly concluded that covid couldn't be airborne.
        
         | deeg wrote:
         | Surely mistakes have been made (proving that they are human)
         | and we should always be ready to reassess something as
         | important as a pandemic response but this seems ungenerous. The
         | multitude of factors that make up the disease and how our
         | bodies respond, along with externalities, is hugely complex.
         | Trying to come up with a single unified response that is
         | understandable by most people makes it harder. Lastly, the
         | political situation just exasperated everything.
         | 
         | Imagine trying to design a national Kubernetes process that
         | everyone would install in their home. ;)
        
       | tootie wrote:
       | > To justify mask requirements in school at this point, health
       | officials should be able to muster solid evidence from randomized
       | trials of masking in children.
       | 
       | I think that's a false premise right off the bat. Even if you
       | stipulate that evidence for masking is not settled beyond a
       | reasonable doubt, it's still at least very plausibly true and
       | very low cost to enforce. I'd need to see pretty strong evidence
       | of why we shouldn't enforce masking.
        
       | 1shooner wrote:
       | I may be missing something, but I don't see any sort statistical
       | accounting for vaccination rates in any of this article's
       | referenced studies. The authors explicitly use this to dismiss
       | studies that saw mask effectiveness, but then go on to offer
       | similarly deficient studies as evidence arguing against masks in
       | schools.
        
       | Avshalom wrote:
       | Whether this article means to it makes the case for requiring
       | vaccination instead, which, yeah we should do that.
        
         | spookthesunset wrote:
         | If vaccination was the answer, why is my triple vaccinated self
         | still required to wear a mask at a grocery store? Worse, why do
         | I need to show proof of vaccine to enter a restaurant yet still
         | be required to wear a mask anyway?
        
           | standardUser wrote:
           | First of all, the number of places where you need to wear a
           | mask inside of stores is fairly tiny. Second, for those
           | places with mask mandates for shops, it's really hard to
           | check everyone for vaccine status and really easy to see if
           | someone is wearing a mask.
           | 
           | As for restaurants... where do you need to wear a mask in a
           | restaurant these days? I often wear it when talking to the
           | host, just to be polite, but that is the only moment I wear a
           | mask in a restaurant.
           | 
           | As for vaccines, they are the "answer" because they
           | dramatically reduce hospitalizations and all of the
           | downstream catastrophes that come from overwhelmed hospitals.
        
           | bobbylarrybobby wrote:
           | It's easier to enforce mask compliance than vaccine
           | compliance because masks are visible and vaccination status
           | is not.
           | 
           | Masking in restaurants for the twenty feet from entrance to
           | table is a bit silly, though.
        
         | mandmandam wrote:
         | The cost / benefit to vaccinating kids is extremely suspect.
         | 
         | Ireland has 1 million children aged 0-14. 1 has died of Covid
         | this entire time. One.
         | 
         | So we need to vaccinate them all every year to _maybe_ prevent
         | half an annual death? No way does that make sense from a cost
         | /benefit perspective (unless you're a Pfizer shareholder).
         | 
         | "But those kids can spread it to their triple- and quadruple
         | vaccinated grandparents!" - What's the NNTV on that?
        
           | duderific wrote:
           | It seems like you're dismissing the reality of small children
           | spreading Covid to more vulnerable populations.
           | 
           | My daughter who is 3 and thus unvaccinated, caught Omicron at
           | daycare. Unfortunately the parents of the child who was
           | spreading it, neglected to inform the daycare that the child
           | was positive. Because of this, we unknowingly spread it to my
           | 81 year old mother in law. This was around Christmas and
           | although she is ok, it was a little touch and go for a while.
           | 
           | I imagine I'm far from the only person who found themselves
           | in this kind of situation.
        
             | mandmandam wrote:
             | I'm glad your MIL is okay. Are you sure she only got ill
             | because we didn't vaccinate every 3 year old?
             | 
             | Say all those children _had_ been vaccinated, all of them,
             | before daycare started. They 'd have gotten a shot or two
             | to be ready for August.
             | 
             | In all likelihood, that wouldn't have done much to protect
             | them from Omicron in December. Omicron featured 32
             | mutations on the spike protein alone, and previous
             | 'vaccines' delivered only 4 months ago offer "very limited
             | protection".
             | 
             | Repeated mass vaccination, of entire generations of
             | children, to protect _already vaccinated_ grandparents -
             | man, that 's going very far. There are many possible
             | unforeseen health consequences to such action - and the
             | lengths to which you'd have to go to get every parent to
             | comply are very fucking far indeed.
        
         | restingrobot wrote:
         | >requiring vaccination instead
         | 
         | Why not natural immunity instead?
        
           | Avshalom wrote:
           | "let god sort em out" is just eugenics.
        
             | restingrobot wrote:
             | >"let god sort em out" is just eugenics.
             | 
             | LOL its not eugenics, its the same for every other
             | infectious disease without a vaccine. Everyone will get
             | omicron/some variant at some point.
        
               | Avshalom wrote:
               | But we have a vaccine.
        
               | TurkishPoptart wrote:
               | But it doesn't work (well enough) to matter.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | It's still really good at reducing hospitalization &
               | death rates, anyway. That's not nothing.
               | 
               | Does seem to be nearly useless at preventing symptomatic
               | Omicron, though. Just makes it, on average, much less
               | awful.
        
               | restingrobot wrote:
               | Not for omicron, or the next variant, or the one after
               | that. At some point we have to face reality, and no it is
               | not eugenics, it called "life".
        
               | amalcon wrote:
               | We do have several vaccines for Omicron. They are the
               | existing COVID vaccines. They aren't as effective as they
               | were against prior variants, but they're still more
               | effective than e.g. flu vaccines, which save many lives
               | each year.
               | 
               | Note that I don't agree with the eugenics comments, but
               | this misinformation about the effectiveness of COVID
               | vaccines is getting out of hand.
        
           | standardUser wrote:
           | Natural immunity from which strain and how long ago? Does
           | someone who recovered from the original strain 18 months ago
           | have comparable protection to someone who recovered from
           | Omicron yesterday? Or someone who has been vaccinated? We do
           | not know these answers.
           | 
           | What we do know - based on mountains of data - is that
           | vaccinated people take up hospital beds far, far less often
           | than unvaccinated people.
        
       | nradov wrote:
       | There is no valid scientific or medical basis to mandate masks at
       | school. It's pure scientism and politics. For anyone who believes
       | that mask mandates should continue please take the time to
       | educate yourself by listening to this panel discussion by a group
       | of leading physicians. UCSF professor and infectious disease
       | expert Dr. Monica Gandhi explains the current science very
       | clearly.
       | 
       | https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/
       | 
       | https://profiles.ucsf.edu/monica.gandhi
       | 
       | Most European countries don't mandate masks for schoolchildren.
        
         | TameAntelope wrote:
         | What? Do masks reduce infection rates? If yes, mandates work.
         | If no, mandates don't. Spoiler: they do. [0]
         | 
         | This is pants-on-head stupid, and has nothing at all to do with
         | politics. Mandates increase adoption rates of measures that
         | _are_ proven to help, and trying to manipulate the situation to
         | say otherwise is the problem, not the mandate.
         | 
         | Anyone opposing masking in schools at this point is literally
         | choosing to risk killing children for stupid political points,
         | and should be profoundly ashamed of their behavior.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-
         | conditions/coronavirus/i...
        
           | johnnyb9 wrote:
           | If the childhood mortality risk associated with Covid is
           | comparable to the flu (which seems to be the case) why
           | weren't we masking every child before Covid?
        
             | TameAntelope wrote:
             | Because the Covid mortality risk for children is _already_
             | with masks, compared to _without_ masks for the flu.
             | 
             | Also, there are considerations other than specifically a
             | child's death that are relevant here, like who that child
             | can spread it to and what negative longterm effects
             | surviving COVID-19 carry, neither of which are as
             | pronounced or unknown as with the flu.
             | 
             | But you knew that already, didn't you?
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | According to the CDC the COVID-19 infection fatality rate
               | for children is 0.002%.
               | 
               | https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-
               | updates/burd...
               | 
               | Children can spread the virus to adults, but adults who
               | want to be vaccinated have been for months now. And since
               | everyone will be exposed anyway it hardly matters who
               | does the exposing.
               | 
               | https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/vinay-prasad/94646
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | How many children are there in the US? I'll let you pick
               | the number you'd like to multiply by 0.00002, to get the
               | number of children you're okay with killing.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | It's easy to act morally superior and make cheap
               | emotional arguments for when you're not the one who has
               | to make hard decisions. All lives have value, but no life
               | has infinite value. You can't seriously expect the
               | majority to endure perpetual mandates and restrictions
               | just to provide some limited, temporary protection to a
               | small minority who are vulnerable due to risk factors
               | like obesity.
               | 
               | https://reason.com/2022/01/03/cdc-covid-19-children-
               | hospital...
               | 
               | And in the long run it won't make any difference anyway.
               | Everyone will be exposed regardless of whether or not
               | schoolchildren are subjected to mask mandates. So what's
               | the point of continuing the charade?
               | 
               | https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/vinay-prasad/94646
        
               | kareemm wrote:
               | > You can't seriously expect the majority to endure
               | perpetual mandates and restrictions just to provide some
               | limited, temporary protection to a small minority who are
               | vulnerable due to risk factors like obesity.
               | 
               | Who is saying the mandates and restrictions are
               | perpetual?
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | I absolutely can expect the majority to endure a _minor_
               | inconvenience, if that minority they 're protecting is a
               | thousand innocent children in a given year (you didn't
               | pick a number, so I will, 78 million children).
               | 
               | And the point is to lower the curve, not avoid exposure.
               | 
               | But, again, you know all of this, you just don't care.
               | Shameful.
        
               | jimmaswell wrote:
               | > minor inconvenience
               | 
               | The impacts on their development shown in the article and
               | rest of the comments are much more than a minor
               | inconvenience
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | xigoi wrote:
               | The mortality of a virus is not affected by whether you
               | were wearing a mask when you caught it.
        
               | jdminhbg wrote:
               | > Because the Covid mortality risk for children is
               | already with masks, compared to without masks for the flu
               | 
               | This is false, which we know because we can measure the
               | fatality rates for children in unmasked locales, and they
               | do not differ from those in masked locales.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Too many confounding variables, those measurements are
               | useless.
        
             | standardUser wrote:
             | The idea is to reduce the spread of the virus in order to
             | protect everyone from a lack of hospital beds and exhausted
             | medical staff. It's not about protecting the individual
             | children (at least not primarily, because they are so low
             | risk). Whether or not this is still a useful approach
             | probably depends on the locale. It seems like places where
             | the Omicron wave is rapidly ending, having children wear
             | masks is entirely pointless.
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | >The idea is to reduce the spread of the virus in order
               | to protect everyone from a lack of hospital beds and
               | exhausted medical staff.
               | 
               | People keep saying this, but if hospital capacity was
               | actually the "real" bottleneck in treating covid then why
               | haven't we seen massive campaigns to expand that
               | capacity? "Do this thing that is marginally beneficial
               | for adults and potentially actively harmful long term for
               | children to possibly impact hospital capacity elsewhere"
               | is not something that makes sense to me. If this was just
               | another bottleneck in some system and not related to the
               | pandemic you'd address the real problem, right?
        
               | standardUser wrote:
               | "why haven't we seen massive campaigns to expand that
               | capacity?"
               | 
               | Maybe we should, but we are talking about an astounding
               | cost, with ongoing upkeep, for once-every-hundred-year
               | events. And that's just for new facilities - we already
               | have nursing shortages.
               | 
               | Instead, we (and just about every other country) have
               | used mitigation efforts to reduce the transmission rate
               | when hospital capacity is threatened. It's a lot cheaper
               | and can be done quickly, unlike building new ICU capacity
               | and training new doctors and nurses (many of whom would
               | be out of the job once the pandemic is over).
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | I'm not following your point.
               | 
               | You say this is expensive and hard, but so what? Isn't
               | that what you do when a pandemic occurs?
               | 
               | You also point out we have a nursing shortage currently
               | (we did before the pandemic as well). Isn't that a reason
               | why we should do this? Kill two birds with one stone ...
               | solve the prior nursing shortage with a training and
               | hiring blitz.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | > People keep saying this, but if hospital capacity was
               | actually the "real" bottleneck in treating covid then why
               | haven't we seen massive campaigns to expand that
               | capacity?
               | 
               | You mean like calling in the national guard to help
               | alleviate the problem or busing in nurses from all over
               | the country, or creating temporary wards, or fighting to
               | get more ventilators and medications? All of those things
               | and more have been happening.
               | 
               | > "Do this thing that is marginally beneficial for adults
               | and potentially actively harmful long term for children
               | 
               | Not only are you minimizing the benefits here, but you're
               | prioritizing potential outcomes over proven ones. That is
               | not something that makes sense to me. I want to make my
               | choices based on our best understanding of the evidence
               | we have right now, not based on things that may or may
               | not ever happen in the future.
               | 
               | Right now, getting vaccinated and wearing a mask when
               | community spread is high in your area are proven to do a
               | lot of good to help prevent very real harms. That's
               | enough for me.
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | Nurses in Boston have been striking for almost a year.
               | I've seen one instance of calling in the national guard
               | recently, and ventilators are no longer the preferred
               | treatment protocol in every case. I haven't seen a single
               | effort to literally build more hospital wings with ICU
               | beds. Have you?
               | 
               | >Not only are you minimizing the benefits here
               | 
               | CDC's own studies did this, not me.
               | 
               | >but you're prioritizing potential outcomes over proven
               | ones.
               | 
               | Yes exactly. We _know_ that kids have an infinitesimally
               | small risk from covid, we know that teachers have a
               | similar risk profile if they 're vaccinated. The
               | "potential" outcomes are catastrophic to development, and
               | we won't know _for years_ what detrimental effects
               | forcing small children to wear masks all the time will
               | have.
               | 
               | Sorry, still doesn't make sense to me. We have one set of
               | known knowns, and one of unknown-ish unknowns, and we're
               | still doing this because people (not you, necessarily)
               | seem to think the goal is to "never get covid".
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Makes you kinda wonder what kind of emergency this is? I
               | mean they tried setting up fully staffed field hospitals
               | in the beginning but they were closed--most without
               | seeing a single patient.
               | 
               | Whatever the hell society is doing right now, it ain't to
               | protect hospital capacity. If hospitals were truly
               | falling apart we'd have done something to fix them.
        
           | cheeseomlit wrote:
           | The chance of a child dying from coronavirus is
           | infinitesimal, the response should be proportional.
        
             | TameAntelope wrote:
             | It's only infinitesimal due to all of the precautions being
             | taken. Remove those precautions, and more children will
             | die.
             | 
             | Also pretty great, you're cool with a couple dozen kids
             | dying because otherwise some kids might be mildly
             | inconvenienced by wearing a mask.
             | 
             | The discomfort is infinitesimal, the response should be
             | proportional.
        
               | TurkishPoptart wrote:
               | More children dealing with Covidism (it's a cult at this
               | point) enforced in schools are going to off themselves
               | from the psychological abuse of being denied a social
               | life than will be saved by enforcing cloth mask policy.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Luckily Covidism isn't real, so it's not very harmful to
               | children.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | I've been pro-masking-in-schools for other reasons
               | (including the practical reality that many schools would
               | have had to shut down without it, since many teachers
               | would have just quit--I know a lot of teachers, and
               | whether you think it's right or wrong, that _was_ going
               | to happen, last school year especially, if precautions
               | like masking, distancing, and long quarantine periods
               | hadn 't been enforced) but the risk _specifically_ to
               | kids under ~12 has been low enough not to trigger my
               | "this is significantly-enough riskier than the average
               | time a kid spends being driven around in a car in a given
               | year, that I should worry about it" alarm pretty much
               | throughout the pandemic. I looked into it when the first
               | semi-reliable mortality numbers started to come in (I
               | have some young kids, so of course I did) and it seemed
               | well below nearly anyone's freak-out threshold, _except_
               | for kids with other risk factors, some of whom probably
               | shouldn 't have been in school at all for any of this.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | > except for kids with other risk factors, some of whom
               | probably shouldn't have been in school at all for any of
               | this
               | 
               | You're likely getting into ADA territory there. Masking
               | during a pandemic to permit at-risk kids to continue to
               | go to school sounds very much like a "reasonable
               | accommodation" of the sort schools are required by law to
               | provide.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | > You're likely getting into ADA territory there. Masking
               | during a pandemic to permit at-risk kids to continue to
               | go to school sounds very much like a "reasonable
               | accommodation" of the sort schools are required by law to
               | provide.
               | 
               | I agree it is a reasonable accommodation, but also cannot
               | imagine sending my own kid to in-person school if they
               | were one of the rare high-risk kids, especially before
               | vaccination was an option. Masking helps over a
               | population, absolutely, but if you're a particular person
               | who's prone to and weak against infection, the way it's
               | been spreading in school even with masking--yikes. Masks
               | and the (mostly lame and questionable, for the simple
               | reason that doing better would have meant building new
               | schools--I saw some _hilariously_ pointless and even
               | _alarmingly counterproductive_ guidelines forwarded from
               | teachers I 'm friends with) distancing practices aren't
               | anywhere _near_ sufficient for that case, IMO.
               | 
               | OTOH, lots of people don't have the option to stay home
               | and watch a high-risk kid. So masking it is (again, I am
               | mostly _very in favor of it_!) but man, that _sucks_ for
               | those kids and their parents.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Right, but _you_ aren 't really someone who should have
               | much of a say over this, and neither are any parents. The
               | people most knowledgable about this topic are (though not
               | universally) arriving at the conclusion that children
               | should continue to wear masks.
               | 
               | Besides, wearing a mask is not exactly a heavy burden to
               | bear. Yes, it's annoying, but the consequences of not
               | doing so are _also_ annoying, and in more than zero cases
               | deadly.
               | 
               | It's such a low burden, that it's almost silly to think
               | about _not_ doing it, given the current situation.
               | 
               | Honestly, it just seems like parents are taking out their
               | frustrations about the _situation_ on other people who
               | are also stuck in this _situation_. It 's absolutely
               | bananas, how acrimonious this has gotten, all because
               | political actors saw a way to divide the country in a way
               | that benefitted them.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | > Besides, wearing a mask is not exactly a heavy burden
               | to bear. Yes, it's annoying, but the consequences of not
               | doing so are also annoying, and in more than zero cases
               | deadly.
               | 
               | Sure, but _tons_ of things are deadly in a non-zero
               | number of cases, which most people give _no_ thought to.
               | Micromorts are everywhere.
               | 
               | I've been baffled at the strong anti-mask reaction and
               | the way so many people've wanted to toss mask mandates
               | and other measures out the _second_ things even slightly
               | improve, but if current trends continue (Omicron burning
               | out, the virus generally getting less-bad, vaccinations
               | continuing to be administered) I 'll have (weakly,
               | without really caring _that_ much) joined team-no-mask-
               | mandates-in-schools by next school year. My kids have
               | been _champs_ at wearing them but it 's clear they're a
               | (minor) problem in school, from the muffling effect if
               | nothing else, and that compliance and good mask-wearing
               | generally is pretty shit among younger kids anyway. I
               | think we're probably past the cost/reward tipping point
               | already, but again, I've tended to favor sticking with
               | safety measures until we're _extra_ sure, if only to
               | avoid policy change whiplash.
               | 
               | OTOH I kind of love masks and hope it remains non-weird
               | to go out in public in one. Two years of _no illnesses_
               | in our house has been awesome.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | There aren't _tons_ of things you do that actively harm
               | others, and when there are those things, they 're
               | regulated and compliance is enforced via legislation.
               | 
               | Wearing/not wearing a mask is not a heavy burden to bear,
               | _and_ by not doing it, you 're increasing the net risk of
               | everyone around you, in addition to your own.
               | 
               | That's what makes this different from wearing a helmet
               | 24/7. But you knew that! Why is this the thing we can't
               | do for one another, this small, one thing?!
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | I'm having trouble figuring out how you're not advocating
               | for never-ending mask mandates, as long as risk reduction
               | is greater than zero (which it would have been _even
               | before Covid_ ). That's how these posts read. _Is_ that
               | what you 're in favor of?
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | If I'm saying anything, I'm saying we should do what the
               | collective expert institutions tell us (and stop
               | listening to individuals, regardless of how qualified),
               | and those institutions are generally sticking with the,
               | "keep masking, kids!" message.
               | 
               | I'm not sure how you can read what I've written and not
               | see how the risk is actually substantially higher than 0,
               | and additionally to other people who have less of a
               | choice about their comfort taking on that risk. I think
               | you are fully aware I'm not suggesting we wear masks
               | forever, but I'm curious about why you feel the need to
               | present that strawman as my position. Is this generally
               | an effective way to communicate for you?
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | >If I'm saying anything, I'm saying we should do what the
               | collective expert institutions tell us (and stop
               | listening to individuals, regardless of how qualified),
               | and those institutions are generally sticking with the,
               | "keep masking, kids!" message.
               | 
               | This just isn't true. Just the other day Sweden decided
               | that they will not be recommending the vax for kids under
               | 11 [1], and the UK has ended their mask mandates all
               | together. The US is part of a select club that is
               | actively ignoring what the data says about how effective
               | these intrusive measures really are. There's other
               | examples from all over the world and their covid outcomes
               | are _better_ that the US, largely because so many in the
               | US were simply unhealthy, out of shape, and fat which
               | weakens your immune system.
               | 
               | Taking your strategy will do much to _weaken_ the general
               | populous ' trust in these institutions.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/sweden-decides-
               | against-...
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | It is absolutely true:
               | 
               | The CDC does. [0]. So does the Mayo Clinic [1]. So does
               | the Cleveland Clinic [2]. So does Johns Hopkins [3]. So
               | does the American Academy of Pediatrics [4].
               | 
               | And the WHO _does_ suggest many children wear masks. [5]
               | 
               | If you don't trust even one of these institutions over
               | your own judgement, you are failing to participate
               | successfully in society.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/s
               | chools-...
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/benefits-
               | of-ki...
               | 
               | [2] https://my.clevelandclinic.org/-/scassets/files/org/e
               | mployer...
               | 
               | [3] https://www.hopkinsallchildrens.org/ACH-News/General-
               | News/Ki...
               | 
               | [4] https://www.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-
               | covid-19...
               | 
               | [5] https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-
               | answers/item/cor...
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | I'm making a point that the US is _unique_ in this
               | regard, and few other countries are being this draconian
               | about masking kids. TFA notes that the CDC 's own data
               | don't lead to the conclusion that these measures do much
               | of anything, and the measures actively ignore the other
               | potential developmental effects on e.g. language
               | processing. Those clinic articles (they're articles,
               | written by what looks like some random communications
               | staffer, not official guidance or studies) just reference
               | CDC guidance. If you look at what the WHO is actually
               | recommending - ignoring how piss poor their guidance has
               | been thus far - it's way more nuanced than you are
               | implying.
               | 
               | I don't really care to reiterate the CDC's own studies
               | cited in TFA, as you and many others seem convinced that
               | we should be masking indefinitely, even after the
               | pandemic "ends".
               | 
               | >If you don't trust even one of these institutions over
               | your own judgement, you are failing to participate
               | successfully in society.
               | 
               | Okay then cast me out? What a weird sentiment. Blind
               | faith in institutions seems unwise.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Firstly, who said anything about faith, let alone blind
               | faith? These institutions are constantly on the forefront
               | of public health policy, and have an overwhelming number
               | of credentials and positive track records that justify
               | trusting them to speak accurately. There is no faith
               | here, only earned trust.
               | 
               | Secondly, you yourself said the US is uniquely
               | vulnerable. Are you now saying it's not?
               | 
               | You can try to strawman all you like, the unavoidable
               | fact is that the institutions with the most credibility
               | in the world are speaking with one voice: mask your
               | children before sending them back to school, and that
               | schools should enforce mask wearing to reduce covid
               | transmission rates.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | The European experts institutions aren't recommending
               | masks for schoolchildren.
               | 
               | https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-school-mask-guidelines-fuel-
               | cul...
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | The CDC does. [0]. So does the Mayo Clinic [1]. So does
               | the Cleveland Clinic [2]. So does Johns Hopkins [3]. So
               | does the American Academy of Pediatrics [4].
               | 
               | And the WHO _does_ suggest many children wear masks. [5]
               | 
               | If you don't trust even one of these institutions over
               | your own judgement, you are failing to participate
               | successfully in society.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/s
               | chools-...
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/benefits-
               | of-ki...
               | 
               | [2] https://my.clevelandclinic.org/-/scassets/files/org/e
               | mployer...
               | 
               | [3] https://www.hopkinsallchildrens.org/ACH-News/General-
               | News/Ki...
               | 
               | [4] https://www.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-
               | covid-19...
               | 
               | [5] https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-
               | answers/item/cor...
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | It's not a straw man, I've been noting that risk to
               | _nearly all_ kids, especially young ones, has _always_
               | been so low that _any_ amount of effort or expense to
               | reduce it would have been questionable (but I was still
               | pro- various measures, including mask mandates, to
               | protect _other people_ in and connected to schools and
               | students, to reduce community rates of infection, while
               | still letting us go back to in-person school-- _that_ was
               | always by far the stronger argument for, specifically,
               | _school_ mask mandates) which is just true unless you 've
               | got some figures at hand that look very different from
               | any I've seen, and that _at some point_ --which we are
               | likely at least approaching--the broader risk and the
               | amount of mitigation we gain from school mask mandates
               | drops below the level of being worth any attention at
               | all, _baring_ some drastic change in the current
               | trajectory of the pandemic.
               | 
               | But you keep coming back like that's an unreasonable
               | position. What's left is... what? The conclusion I came
               | to, right?
               | 
               | > Is this generally an effective way to communicate for
               | you?
               | 
               | I'm just trying to understand WTF you're getting at. I
               | don't have a clue what you _think_ I 'm trying to do.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | Why are you ignoring the multiple times I've talked about
               | the effects that _aren 't_ directly related to the
               | children? They're carriers too, and that matters, on top
               | of everything else.
               | 
               | And the institutions I trust _do not_ agree with you that
               | we 're "rapidly approaching" any such loss of value from
               | masking in schools. That's just straight up wrong.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | > Why are you ignoring the multiple times I've talked
               | about the effects that aren't directly related to the
               | children? They're carriers too, and that matters, on top
               | of everything else.
               | 
               | How is posting that exact thing--so, _agreeing_ with
               | you-- _more explicitly_ ( "to protect other people in and
               | connected to schools and students, to reduce community
               | rates of infection") than you have until this very post
               | (it's at best implied in all your other posts, from what
               | I can tell, and I just re-read them to be sure--but maybe
               | you had that on your mind and it just didn't come across
               | strongly?) ignoring that point? It's far and away the
               | strongest argument for masking in schools.
               | 
               | > And the institutions I trust do not agree with you that
               | we're "rapidly approaching" any such loss of value from
               | masking in schools. That's just straight up wrong.
               | 
               | We better be, because I'm pretty sure they're going away
               | before long no matter what either of us want (again,
               | barring a large change in course for the pandemic). Shit,
               | around here they already did drop them for a couple weeks
               | right before the Omicron surge and schools had to
               | scramble to bring them back to avoid having to shut down
               | completely (again: man, I _hate_ the insistence on
               | removing safety measures ASAP, it 's been proven a stupid
               | idea every single time it's happened so far in my city,
               | yet people, including e.g. school administrators, _keep_
               | going  "OK looks better this week, we should start
               | removing our safety measures"). Our city-wide mandates
               | are currently gone and were being largely ignored for
               | about a month before they were removed. It borders on
               | miraculous that schools have been successful at keeping
               | mandates in place as long and consistently as they have--
               | and if not for the _fact_ that they 'd have ended up
               | horrendously under-staffed and had to shut down without
               | them, I absolutely don't think they'd have worked as hard
               | at it as they have. Admin _hates_ pissing off parents,
               | even if it 's only a few of them, and the anti-maskers
               | have been the angriest and most-active participants in
               | these goings-on. From what I can see the (very credible)
               | threat of mass teacher resignations and walk-outs (plus,
               | you know, just the risk of too many of them being sick at
               | once) are the only reason mask mandates in schools
               | persisted for any amount of time at all (and, again, I'm
               | glad they have!) outside maybe the "bluest" of "blue"
               | strongholds, but I don't think that pressure's gonna keep
               | up much longer.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | The high school in my conservative county has reinstated
               | mask mandates, and it hasn't really been very dramatic at
               | all. Most parents generally get it, but I live in a
               | flyover state so nobody cares that it's working fine
               | here.
        
               | brimble wrote:
               | Yeah, they all kinda had to with Omicron because it's
               | _so_ damn contagious that even with the reduced 5-day
               | quarantine guidelines and drastic reductions in the
               | circumstances under which one must quarantine (which
               | changes I 'm about 90% sure are BS from a pure public
               | health perspective, and just a practical-minded
               | compromise aimed at preventing a _de facto_ shutdown from
               | having half the damn country in quarantine at once in the
               | Omicron surge) some local districts were seeing days when
               | they were short _hundreds_ of subs to cover for all the
               | teachers who were out.
               | 
               | [EDIT] BTW, no hard feelings, I genuinely wasn't trying
               | to piss you off. Communication is hard. Sorry if it
               | sucked this time. [EDIT EDIT] LOL, and that phrasing was
               | too wishy-washy. Sorry if _I_ sucked at it, this time.
        
               | TameAntelope wrote:
               | I'm just sick of giving an inch to evil people and
               | watching them take a mile. I'm done doing it, even if it
               | makes me sound like an ass as a result.
        
           | meragrin_ wrote:
           | Um, it says "can" and not "do". It says "can" because it
           | depends entirely on the person wearing it. Trained
           | professionals in a short term controlled environment, I am
           | sure they work great. Kids in a school, not worth it. The
           | neglect in "frequent hand-washing", "physical distancing",
           | and other habits are going to lay waste to any positive
           | impact the masks may have. No one is going to spend the time
           | to instill the necessary habits to make masks worthwhile in
           | school.
        
             | TameAntelope wrote:
             | So teach the children how to wear masks. We don't let kids
             | shit on the floor because they don't innately know how to
             | use toilets...
        
               | meragrin_ wrote:
               | Who's going to teach them? Parents aren't going to have
               | time or will miss critical areas. Teachers won't want to
               | do it. If teachers do attempt it, it would likely be
               | weeks or months of education down the drain since they'll
               | be constantly taking breaks to correct students one by
               | one.
        
           | dymk wrote:
           | More children will probably die in the years to come by
           | suicide due to overburdensome restrictions and nuked social
           | development than by COVID.
        
           | wrycoder wrote:
           | Exec summary: N95s work. Others, not so much, and less than
           | we've been claiming up until now.
        
           | heisenbit wrote:
           | Sadly they are not just killing children but children are
           | clearly one of the most important vectors carrying the virus
           | from family to family. Childcare and schools are the super
           | nodes in an otherwise socially distanced network. Any effort
           | to slow down the spread in these places will be multiplied
           | across the whole population. Considering the breakdown of
           | medical care system not doing anything right now is
           | irresponsible.
        
         | jiveturkey wrote:
         | > scientism
         | 
         | Thanks for that.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | Monica Gandhi has been incorrectly predicting the end of the
         | pandemic for quite some time. Long thread with video examples
         | here:
         | https://twitter.com/KindAndUnblind/status/147038993167988326...
         | 
         | For example: June 29, 2021: "I actually do not wear masks
         | unless the business asks me to, bc I feel really protected by
         | my vaccine, and I also feel that I can't spread it to
         | others...these vaccines are effective against variants, they
         | make it so that you can't transmit..."
        
           | jdminhbg wrote:
           | > For example: June 29, 2021: "I actually do not wear masks
           | unless the business asks me to, bc I feel really protected by
           | my vaccine, and I also feel that I can't spread it to
           | others...these vaccines are effective against variants, they
           | make it so that you can't transmit..."
           | 
           | That was exactly the CDC's publicly stated view at the time.
           | Pre-Delta, it was to a first approximation true. Citing this
           | as if it's evidence of her spreading misinformation is
           | exceptionally dishonest.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Even the most optimistic data we ever had was ~90%
             | reduction in infection. That the vaccines on the market
             | were not sterilizing has been evident since the start.
             | 
             | There are a _lot_ of examples in that thread, too. She 's
             | been confidently predicting hitting herd immunity, no need
             | for boosters, last wave, etc. sort of stuff for a long
             | time.
        
               | jdminhbg wrote:
               | It's fine to say with hindsight that vaccine predictions
               | were wrong, but again, that was the official position of
               | the CDC and Biden administration at the time as well, so
               | it's hugely dishonest to pretend like she's some kind of
               | extremist or disinformation artist for being on the same
               | page as them.
               | 
               | It's not really the reader's responsibility to check
               | everything else in the thread to see how you and/or the
               | thread author are either lying or failing to remember
               | very public facts about the pandemic.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | > It's fine to say with hindsight that vaccine
               | predictions were wrong...
               | 
               | It's also fine to say I'm not inclined to trust the
               | opinions of someone who has been _repeatedly and
               | demonstrably_ wrong in this fashion.
               | 
               | I know Biden got out over his skis on a number of
               | statements, but can you cite the CDC ever making this
               | claim? The wording they were using in June 2021 was
               | _reduce_ infection.
               | https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0607-mrna-
               | reduce-ri...
               | 
               | "I also feel that I can't spread it to others" is a
               | confident, evidence-free, and _wrong_ statement.
        
               | jdminhbg wrote:
               | Those CDC claims are now _demonstrably wrong_ in the same
               | post-Delta world you're judging her claims by. When the
               | CDC recommended that vaccinated people no longer needed
               | to wear masks, exactly what do you think they were
               | claiming that is different from Gandhi?
               | 
               | It's fine if you want to ignore people who've made
               | predictions about Covid that turned out to be wrong, but
               | it just means you have to ignore everyone.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Gandhi's claim was wrong _at the time_. Right then and
               | there. There was no indication the vaccines were
               | sterilizing; she was just wishful thinking.
        
       | pcmoney wrote:
       | Vaccines for Covid are available. Vaccines do not stop the spread
       | of Covid. Vaccines do not stop you from getting Covid. Vaccines
       | do reduce the probability of severe/fatal cases of covid.
       | 
       | Masks are available. Most masks in most situations do little to
       | stop the spread of Covid. Well fitted N95s are more effective.
       | 
       | Getting vaccinated or wearing a mask is clearly a personal health
       | decision. Vaccine mandates are ridiculous given the above. Mask
       | mandates are ridiculous given the above. Mandates in general show
       | little impact on actually changing behavior.
       | 
       | The risk to children is incredibly low. The coronavirus is
       | endemic, we are all going to get it.
       | 
       | Lets move on already.
       | 
       | If you are fearful of coronavirus or at risk you can do what you
       | think is necessary to stay safe. You don't get to use your fear
       | or neuroses to control others.
        
         | ASinclair wrote:
         | > Vaccines do not stop the spread of Covid. Vaccines do not
         | stop you from getting Covid.
         | 
         | The vaccines still reduce the likelihood of infection and thus
         | slow the spread of Covid. It's true their effectiveness against
         | Omicron is reduced compared to prior variants.
        
         | clairity wrote:
         | yes, please copy and paste this at the top of every covid
         | thread. i can't believe people still believe 2 years on that
         | there is "something" we can do to stop covid. it's endemic,
         | assess/mitigate your own risk and move the fuck on.
        
       | k2enemy wrote:
       | I thought the paragraphs about requiring KN95 in schools were
       | interesting.
       | 
       | My kids' school district recently had a policy change that
       | requires everyone to wear KN95 or KF94 masks. What I've noticed
       | is that most kids (including mine) have switched from high
       | quality (Halo) well fitting cloths masks with filters to 95 or
       | 94s with huge gaps around their noses. It is hard to believe that
       | this is an improvement in safety.
        
         | TurkishPoptart wrote:
         | It's safetyism. It's to prevent snarky parents from speaking
         | out and holding the school liable if one kid gets a head cold
         | from Omicron.
        
         | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
         | I used to use KN95 mask for sanding projects but they never
         | worked because only after a short period I almost always ended
         | up with a gap that allowed a lot of sanding dust (which I
         | assume is a large particle than a virus) in causing me to have
         | headaches all day. So I don't have a whole lot of faith that
         | KN95s are much better (at least over long term wear).
        
       | somewhereoutth wrote:
       | As ever, another pro Covid article makes it to the front page.
       | 
       | As ever, HN falls over itself to demonstrate ignorance and
       | selfishness.
       | 
       | Meanwhile Covid continues killing and maiming. The butcher's bill
       | for this our collective failure is going to be hard reading.
       | 
       | Shame on us all.
        
       | hogrider wrote:
       | Wtf, masks absolutely work. Who is pushing this stuff and for
       | what nefarious reasons? Do they think all children should get
       | exposed early to the virus and then we'll develop heard immunity
       | in decades to come? We have the vaccine for that.
        
         | spookthesunset wrote:
         | If we have a vaccines, why do we need masks? Do vaccines not
         | work or something?
        
         | skrbjc wrote:
         | It's not saying to not vaccinate kids, it's saying the evidence
         | says masks are ineffective at preventing the spread of covid in
         | schools, which means it's meaningless to wear them, and that
         | there is a negative cognitive effect on kids with wearing
         | masks, so we should weigh that.
         | 
         | Feel free to post a link that confirms "Wtf, masks absolutely
         | work" in the context of kids in schools and the Omicron
         | variant.
        
         | jimmyjazz14 wrote:
         | The person "pushing" this is apparently Margery Smelkinson who
         | according to bio on the Atlantic is an infectious-disease
         | scientist whose research has focused on influenza and SARS-
         | CoV-2, further research indicates that she is a staff scientist
         | at The National Institutes of Health. So you know, just another
         | one of those run of the mill nut jobs out there. Although she
         | did at least manage to string together a few paragraphs laying
         | out her case and citing sources as compared to you single
         | sentence rebuttable.
        
         | desmosxxx wrote:
         | Context matters. In this case it is in the context of spending
         | multiple hours in close proximity with a virus as contagious as
         | Omicron.
        
         | xondono wrote:
         | > Wtf, masks absolutely work.
         | 
         | I'm not that sure. A lot of experts agree that there's not much
         | quality data to reach that conclusion.
         | 
         | Most "definitive proof" comes from mechanical studies (they
         | measure how far your saliva is reaching with and with out
         | mask), but that's not the only important factor.
         | 
         | Masks are not designed for full day use, and by wearing them
         | everyone is constantly touching their face, mouth and nose.
         | This sounds to me like a _way_ worse infection vector. Viruses
         | like covid can survive for a long time on surfaces.
         | 
         | It's hard to separate the effects of masks from that of hand
         | sanitizer, vaccinations, or other measures taken.
        
           | veemjeem wrote:
           | Nurses working in the ICU during the beginning of the
           | pandemic would use the same mask for an entire week without
           | losing efficacy. If the masks didn't work, we would have seen
           | a huge number of them infected in the NYC hospitals but that
           | didn't happen. Most viruses don't survive very long on
           | surfaces.
        
             | xondono wrote:
             | Nurses in ICU are constantly sanitizing their hands, use
             | gloves and are trained about the dangers of constantly
             | touching your face.
             | 
             | > Most viruses don't survive very long on surfaces.
             | 
             | Virus can last for days on glass, metals and other non
             | porous surfaces.
        
             | dusing wrote:
             | ICU nurses wear N95 masks that are fitted and tested (a bad
             | tasting/smelling aerosol is used). It is completely sealed
             | around the face. This is how my SIL did COVID ICU for 1.5
             | years every week without contracting it. Not the same as
             | the one size fits all n95 people loosely place on their
             | faces.
        
         | twic wrote:
         | > masks absolutely work
         | 
         | The handful of large, high-quality studies show that cloth
         | masks have no significant effect on transmission, and FFP2/N95
         | masks have at best a small effect. The article talks about
         | specific reasons to think that even FFP2/N95 masks might be
         | substantially less effective in schools.
        
       | jimmyswimmy wrote:
       | An interesting article. I was recently unimpressed by the new
       | Virginia governor's first action to reaching the mandate on masks
       | in schools. My county has elected to retain its own mask mandate.
       | 
       | At first blush a mask mandate is generally a public good. I keep
       | my germs to myself, you keep yours too yourself, and we don't get
       | the flu, or a cold, or COVID, whatever. And so for me despite not
       | living wearing a mask I have been happy to anytime I'm near
       | others.
       | 
       | The article makes a decent case that, at least for kids in
       | schools, the science to support the utility of masks just isn't
       | there. At first I found this surprising - how could it not be? At
       | least it should help. But kids are in school, together, for 6+
       | hours a day. I barely wear my mask properly for two hours at a
       | time and I understand how they work. Kids don't care, they're
       | just doing what they're told, cargo cult style. Of course they
       | won't be written perfectly, which reduces their effectiveness.
       | But the idea that they don't help at all, or at least
       | statistically so, is astonishing.
       | 
       | And the article provides evidence of that, cutting neighboring
       | counties in Tennessee with similar vaccination rates where one
       | had a 23% lower making rate, but similar spread. How can that be?
       | Truly fascinating.
       | 
       | Much as we've seen the downside of forced closures and lockdowns,
       | this article reminds us that there may be downsides for kids and
       | masks. I wasn't open to this possibility previously. What could
       | be the downside to putting on a mask? And the answer is, we just
       | don't know. How can we follow the science if we don't have any
       | research?
       | 
       | I continue to be glad to be a resident of the US, whose
       | federalist system allows all these different jurisdictions to try
       | different rules that may work better for them. It gives us a
       | chance to study these differences and learn from them.
       | 
       | Really thought provoking article. While I wait for more studies,
       | guess I'll keep wearing this mask around people. Can't hurt,
       | right? Probably.
        
         | AuryGlenz wrote:
         | A large portion of people wear cloth masks, which are largely
         | ineffective. In addition, you're talking about a group of 20+
         | people being in close proximity for at least an hour. (Most)
         | masks are only going to reduce the number of viruses spread, so
         | it might buy you a little extra time around someone that's
         | infected - but at some point enough will get through.
        
           | davidw wrote:
           | In the US, at least. In countries like Italy, they mostly
           | wear surgical masks and have started a broader push for FFP2
           | masks. I find this kind of bizarre - the US has a lot more
           | money than a place like Italy, but I guess they cared more
           | about trying to layer some preventative measures instead of
           | turning crappy cloth masks into some sort of weird self-
           | expression thing.
        
         | dfxm12 wrote:
         | _And the article provides evidence of that, cutting neighboring
         | counties in Tennessee with similar vaccination rates where one
         | had a 23% lower making rate, but similar spread. How can that
         | be? Truly fascinating._
         | 
         | There's more to this than vaccination and masking rate. When
         | we're talking about being indoors all day, one other variable
         | in this is ventilation. For their part, the CDC does suggest
         | considering improving ventilation in buildings. Vaccination is
         | probably the best single tool we have and if everyone who could
         | have been vaccinated was, we'd be in a different situation.
         | However, with so many refusing, you have to get into the
         | minutia about wearing masks, sitting certain distance apart,
         | ventilation, etc., but people aren't good about going into the
         | minutia or dealing with the fact that people in different
         | situations (like different building with different ventilation)
         | should behave differently.
         | 
         | Even knowing this, a lot of places simply don't want to spend
         | money on infrastructure, including improving schools.
         | 
         | 0 -
         | https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/ventilat...
        
         | naasking wrote:
         | > But kids are in school, together, for 6+ hours a day.
         | 
         | This is probably the relevant variable. If you're sharing the
         | same air space with someone carrying an airborne virus, it
         | probably doesn't matter that a mask is filtering 95% if you're
         | both breathing the same air in an enclosed space for 6 hours.
         | Some minimal viral load is needed for infection, and even with
         | 95% filtering you'll probably surpass that threshold after 6
         | hours.
        
       | another_story wrote:
       | In Taiwan we've been wearing masks for over 2 years with near
       | zero complaint at school. I have to remind a few kids a day to
       | put it over their nose. We've had Omicron here for awhile, but
       | it's still only a trickle of cases, with no exponential
       | explosion. The policies here, with contact tracing, quarantine
       | and masks, have kept things open and people from dying. I don't
       | understand the hesitancy.
        
       | u801e wrote:
       | It appears that the article is looking at vaccination in addition
       | to mask usage. There are many areas of the US where vaccination
       | percentages are relatively low and vaccination percentage of
       | children between the ages of 5 to 11 are even lower.
       | 
       | While children may not wear masks correctly, at a population
       | level, it stands to reason that wearing masks will reduce the
       | chance of transmission. Just like condoms have a theoretical
       | effectiveness of 98% when used properly, but real world use shows
       | an effectiveness rate of 82%, mask usage should still reduce
       | transmission, but not to the extent that they would given proper
       | use. But that doesn't mean that they're not effective at all and
       | there's no need to use them. Looking at it from a population
       | perspective versus an individual perspective in terms of
       | transmission and the chance of contracting the disease, they
       | should still have some beneficial effect.
       | 
       | The other part of the equation is the use of multiple strategies
       | to mitigate transmission. For example, social distancing,
       | limiting the number of people, and reducing the time spent
       | indoors. All these factors put together will reduce transmission
       | even if people aren't perfect in terms of compliance.
        
         | dchichkov wrote:
         | You may look at the data of how much protection masks add
         | between the ages of 5 to 11 and 2 to 5. And how much other
         | mitigations measures add (ventilation, cohorting, etc). You'll
         | find that high quality masks for teachers reduce spread a lot.
         | Masks for kids - the effect can't be clearly registered.
         | 
         | And using masks for kids, particularly outdoors is a hazard in
         | itself. Masks tend to block lower peripheral vision. Which
         | results in kids tripping and falling more often. Falls and
         | playground injuries are a common cause of hospitalizations in
         | the US [the order of 100k kids/year]. Masks also reduce ability
         | to communicate [hazard]. And it is unclear what is the long-
         | term impact on kids development.
         | 
         | Overall, at least to me, masking kids outdoors at this stage
         | seem wrong. Indoor - questionable, it'd be good to see more
         | statistics for this particular mitigation measure, if de-
         | correlated from other mitigation measures.
        
           | apgwoz wrote:
           | > And it is unclear what is the long-term impact on kids
           | development.
           | 
           | Keep in mind that it's also pretty unclear the long term
           | effects of contracting COVID (even with no symptoms) in the
           | first place. What about getting COVID twice? Three times?
           | Four times? I'd rather do what I can to ensure my kids don't
           | get it at all, are vaccinated, social distance, etc.
           | Hopefully we'll get to a place where vaccinations / natural
           | immunity reduce cases to a point where masks no longer make
           | sense, but until then...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-01-27 23:01 UTC)