Posted by: chupacabra
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536
Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the efficacy of community mask wearing to reduce the spread of respiratory infections was controversial because there were no solid relevant data to support their use. During the pandemic, the scientific evidence has increased. Compelling data now demonstrate that community mask wearing is an effective nonpharmacologic intervention to reduce the spread of this infection, especially as source control to prevent spread from infected persons, but also as protection to reduce wearers’ exposure to infection.
This always seemed to be a bit of a no brainer to me. The discussion is always good v no good, when it seemed obvious it would help since they will catch some of the spray coming from our mouths. The question was simply by how much will they help. We all saw the dipshits with the mask under their nose, but they were maybe 1 in 25. Some will wear them incorrectly, but that will always just be percentage and part of the calculation. It is just numbers. Nobody would question that saving a few cents here or a dollar there will save money overall. When you consider that wearing a mask is pretty much the easiest sacrifice anyone could make and it could save lives, why not just do it?
Hey, that's better info than what I've seen - and yes more current than 14 months ago ;) There's still some open areas in it tho which is why I had questions about the effectiveness of masks. Personally I find them uncomfortable to the point of hating to have them on for extended periods, reasons for which probably extend beyond most people. Those reasons are not what I'd consider enough of a reason to warrant a medical exemption, but they do affect my breathing. That said, I've always worn one when required as most of the time I had to have them on was luckily only for short periods,usually less than 10 minutes - the exception being all day at work. There it was a no brainer for me as working in a gym full of people breathing hard represented high risk. I spent the majority of my time in the office though to max out on physical distancing. Your point how how much they will help has always been my question, especially when taken into consideration of how/when they are used by myself and the population as whole.
My point about when they are most effective is held up in that study as well as all the others I've read - when people spend time in smaller enclosed spaces with other people where significant breath exchange takes place between different individuals. For situations like restaurants, masks can't be worn. Same thing if people are say at a pub, movie theatre, etc. So my issue came down to the question of where masks will be most effective, and in those situations they're not practical or aren't being worn. That's where physical distancing and limiting the time length of your exposure is probably as or even more effective than mask. And of course vax's make a huge difference.
So why not just do it (wearing a mask)? Pragmatism, risk evaluation and personal comfort. When required I did wear them and even in the beginning when not required I did. I was even wearing my respirator for max protection at first. But as I found more info and considered my own risk exposure, the idea of needing to have a mask on to protect others and myself became less necessary. I think if we had 90% or higher compliance with physical distancing, masking, shutdowns and better border closures - especially airlines, we could have either not had to go through this at all or had it be way less of an issue than it was. Back at the beginning Govt's and health officials made arguments against closing air traffic and/or mandatory quarantines, probably the biggest mistake in all of this. The controls at YVR for international flights were basically non-existant, the Feds really fucked that one up imho.
Going forward I think covid is here for good and it's now a game of managing it vs eradicating it - similar to how we deal with the flu. I'll be happy t be wrong on that one tho. Better guidelines/practices are still needed for not only protecting the most vulnerable, but I think also figuring out who they are. They're not just the elderly. We will probably need yearly booster shots and should probably considered tight regulations around travel . Between climate change, environmental pollution. coivd and god knows what else is coming down the pipe next, I almost wish I was a bit older so I didn't have to live with this shit for another 40 yrs or so.
Oh, and with what Couch_Surfer said, definitely don't lump me into the anti-vax or anti-mask/freedom crowds - I'm not either of those. I know I'm cutting a thin wedge here, but I'm also not denying reputable science either.
