Fauci Says CDC May Recommend Wearing Two Masks To Fight Virus (bloomberg.com) 322
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: The Centers for Disease Control may recommend wearing two masks -- one over the other -- to keep at bay the more contagious variants of the coronavirus, according to Anthony Fauci. The CDC and Fauci discussed the matter Monday but the agency doesn't yet have the data to make any formal recommendation, he said Tuesday during a Washington Post event. Still, "it makes common sense" to increase protection, Fauci said. The infectious disease expert has previously endorsed double-masking given the new strains of the virus.
Why stop there?? (Score:5, Funny)
https://babylonbee.com/news/tr... [babylonbee.com]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why stop there? How about the whole box [maga.host]?
Also, see related [babylonbee.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Even better: buy a whole carton of masks, throw out the masks and wear the carton over your head.
Not the best direction to go. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Because that is harder. Fit is not easy to provide a simple recommendation on, but double-masking is likely to have an improvement beyond an extra layer of fabric. Fit might make a given mask improve from 20% effective to 80%, if you get it right, but a double mask might go from 20% to 50% more reliably.
Personally, I think we are at the point where the government needs to be handing out masks of sufficient quality to people in high-risk settings (location dot activities). Blanket recommendations are not
Just stop meeting people in person. (Score:3)
It's sooo effective. Everyone should try it for once.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a nice idea if you're a tech worker who can work from home. If you're in, say, construction, or grocery, or restaurants, or many other industries, you kind of have to meet people in person.
Who will seal the edges of the mask? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Staples. Use a stapler.
Re: (Score:2)
How? There should actually be less (ideally equal) pressure on each individual mask, even if the pressure is increased when both masks are taken together.
You can understand why if you think of it as an electrical circuit where a mask is a resistor, airflow is current and pressure is voltage. Two masks is like two resistors in series.
Another way to look at it, if you insist on counting both masks as one is to consider that the increased pressure from the air is compensated by the increased pressure on your f
FUCK SLASHDOT'S ASCII ART FILTERS (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saluting the horse (Score:2)
nothing personal, he's a great horse, but really, you have to stop this
Sounds familiar... (Score:5, Funny)
All your face (Score:3)
are belong to us.
Like that's going to make any difference. (Score:2)
The general populace can't seem to wear a single mask properly or consistently now. What makes anyone think that doubling up would actually get practised?
And they wonder why there are deniers... (Score:4, Insightful)
With officials being just as nuts, but in the opposite direction...
No, it doesn't increase protection. It increases profit! And the amount of constant suffocation.
How about one *proper* mask, used *properly*?
How about teaching your citizens the damn basics of germ theory so they don't do stupid things like touch the faucet with dirty hands, wash their hands, then touch the dirty faucet again, making the whole thing pointless...? Or worse much things, done to a mask, every day.
I know *exactly* why and where the virus spreads. And it's not the mask. It's the completely clueless and braindead behavior of the user. Due to not teaching them how to think for themselves.
Call me when they've at the very least watched that Mythbusters episode with the UV paint that spread EVERYWHERE...
Re: (Score:2)
Oh fuck off you ignorant twat.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
With officials being just as nuts, but in the opposite direction...
No, it doesn't increase protection. It increases profit! And the amount of constant suffocation.
How about one *proper* mask, used *properly*?
How about the richest medical system on the planet, NOT being about to provide *even that* to frontline workers 2 months into this pandemic?
How convenient ignorant citizens forget what actually caused all of this bullshit t-shirt mask nonsense. With the amount of money in the US Medical Industrial Complex, every single citizen should have been provided a stockpile of N95 masks a year ago and nothing less. We wouldn't be here discussing such stupid shit if we had.
I know *exactly* why and where the virus spreads. And it's not the mask. It's the completely clueless and braindead behavior of the user. Due to not teaching them how to think for themselves.
Wrong. People do plenty to think for thems
Anal swabs and cotton balls (Score:5, Funny)
Since anal swabs are now sometimes used to detect the virus, why not stick a cotton ball up your anus to filter the virus from the occasional fart?
Re: (Score:2)
Since anal swabs are now sometimes used to detect the virus, why not stick a cotton ball up your anus to filter the virus from the occasional fart?
You ended this statement, with something that actually sounds more believable than what you started it with.
I'd be impressed if I wasn't laughing so hard. Thanks for that.
Not a problem for divers (Score:3, Funny)
I always don my drysuit, hood, and gloves and find a 10L cylinder of air at 200bar gets me whereever I need to go and back again. I always do a safety stop 5m from my front door. Currently looking for a full face mask in a Darth Vader style.
uhhh.. (Score:2)
Re:Wait for data before speculating nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
Common masks don't protect the wearer very much
Note: masks do prevent the spread of the virus, but basically like this [hdnux.com].
Blocking Droplets is NOT the only effect (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Blocking Droplets is NOT the only effect (Score:4, Insightful)
Other diseases aren't SARS-CoV-2. There is virtually no fomite transmission as near as anyone can tell, so the fact that you touch your face more is largely irrelevant. It's mostly aerosol transmission, though there's some mounting evidence that there's purely airborne transmission in confined spaces.
The more PPE you layer on, the safer you are—so if you have a face shield to block sneezes and other direct aerosol blasts, you're safer. More filtration at the mask is better, because the new variants are about 50% more transmissible. We know that masks work, broadly speaking, because if they didn't, we'd have zero healthcare workers up and active right now. They use more PPE than we do, but the concepts aren't somehow different just because our masks are cheaper or only 80% effective when there's one layer. This isn't magic.
But ultimately, the best advice is to not be near other people, indoors, where ventilation is poor.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you replied to the wrong post.
Re:Wait for data before speculating nonsense (Score:4, Insightful)
“There’s nothing wrong with that, but there’s no data that indicates that that is going to make a difference,” Fauci said during a video livestream interview with the American Federation of Teachers.
Re:Wait for data before speculating nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
> The virus is much smaller than the holes in the mask
The virus is smaller than holes in n95, but fortunately that's not how it works.
Viruses usually spread on droplets of water (and various human goos) not as individual protein strands floating on air. Most masks do a good job with this. GATech did a nice study with lasers and everything if you want to read a paper, but basically n95 is good, most masks are pretty good, gaiters aren't and bandanas turn out to be really bad (surprise).
Try blowing out a birthday candle with any of the normal masks on and you'll get an idea about viral load reduction. Air molecules are even smaller than viruses!
Re: Wait for data before speculating nonsense (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Depends on what you mean by "very much". And we've been dealing with this virus for how long and people are still pretending masks don't work because they incorrectly keep insisting, _this fucking far_ into the pandemic, that any meaningful percentage of infections is due to naked virus floating in the air? Fucking seriously?
For fuck's sake, please listen. It doesn't matter how big the fucking virus is. It's carried by moisture from your body, and the masks collect some percentage of that moisture as you ex
Common masks protect everybody around (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember the virus mostly spreads through droplets that are too large to go through the mask. Individual viral particles aren't the problem, it's the spit they're contained in.
It's true that masks don't protect the wearer all that much, and, well, that's the problem with our society right now. There's a really "fuck you, I got mine" attitude that pervades our entire culture. An intense anti-social attitude where anything that doesn't immediately benefit the individual and only the individual is collectivist group think evil. It's an outgrowth of the constant attacks on Government doing things that benefit the general populace.
Re:Common masks protect everybody around (Score:5, Informative)
I'll assume you are being sincere here and not pushing an agenda. I will thus point you to two studies.
The first shows that typical surgical masks are not particularly effective at protecting wearers [nih.gov]. Unfortunate, but seems true.
The second shows that when people wear masks in general, it reduces the spread of COVID through the community [ajtmh.org].
So wear a mask to protect others. The effectiveness of your mask is dependent upon whether the person you are talking to is wearing one.
Re: (Score:3)
So you are saying that a mask is OPE (Other Protective Equipment), not PPE (Personal Protective Equipment)?
It's both (Score:3)
I'm aware of the studies (Score:3)
There are also other studies [npr.org] out there indicating higher effectiveness for he wearer. The data is kind of all over right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait do you think people literally exhale viruses? Its the particulate matter like saliva that carries the virus.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait do you think people literally exhale viruses? Its the particulate matter like saliva that carries the virus.
Your exhalations contain a LOT of moisture from your lungs, with the relative humidity being 100%. From: Relative humidity of human exhaled breath [narkive.com] (and other sources):
The short answer is that exhaled air is saturated with water --100% relative humidity.
Those tiny moisture droplets can carry the virus. Fortunately, N95 (and other) masks capture those droplets and, with them, the virus. The moisture eventually dries out and the virus particles die.
Re:Wait for data before speculating nonsense (Score:4, Informative)
The virus is much smaller than the holes in the mask
The overwhelming majority of viral cells are not just happily floating around, they are attached to microdroplets, and they don't go through the mask.
But sure continue ignoring both science and the studies which have been done that prove you wrong. Your ability to double down on your own stupidity is astounding.
Re: (Score:2)
"the agency doesn't yet have the data to make any formal recommendation"
There's a reason doctors wear N95 masks and not two ineffective masks.
Yes, and there's also many reasons doctors don't walk around with mil-spec gas masks on too, even when it is perfectly justified. Cost, functional mobility, and not scaring the patients to death come to mind. It has nothing to do with the fact that protection above and beyond N95 isn't valid. Unfortunately, there are plenty of N95 wearing front-line workers are getting sick and dying too.
Re:Why not three? (Score:4, Informative)
If two work better than one, why not three? Why not four?
At this point, the comedy of inept government versus this virus has gone into overtime.
Assuming you're not either joking or a moron -- or both -- there's (obviously) a decreasing efficacy because of a decreased ability to exchange air and breathe through increasing layers. The recommendations for two masks are generally for the first to be a high efficiency model, like K95, covered by a cloth-type mask that will help cover and seal the underlying mask more completely. In addition, the outer cloth mask, that can be easily washed, can help keep the underlying K95 mask cleaner longer.
This is not a case of inept government, but changing tactics to combat new variants that are more easily transmissible with configurations that make that transmission even more difficult.
Actually the two masks reduce effectiveness ... (Score:2)
The recommendations for two masks are generally for the first to be a high efficiency model, like K95, covered by a cloth-type mask that will help cover and seal the underlying mask more completely.
That's not correct. An N95 or KN95 will seal correctly. The problem is some find it uncomfortable for extended durations, the President included. The two maskers like Joe are going for a **looser** fit for comfort. They don't use the N95 ear loops, rather they use the outer looser mask to soft-of hold the N95 mask in place. This out-of-spec loose fit likely reduces the effectiveness of the N95.
Re: (Score:2)
An N95 or KN95 will seal correctly.
More correctly, "can" seal correctly, if adjusted and worn properly. Many (most?) people aren't trained on how to wear these things properly or, as you pointed out, don't for a variety of reasons.
Re:Why not three? (Score:4, Interesting)
They're actually suggesting to just wear two cloth masks. Fauci isn't the first one to recommend it. Instead of allocating billions to mass-produce N95 masks last March, we instead farted around with paper and cloth masks only to discover that, hey, maybe that isn't good enough?
Wearing a cloth mask over an N95 might help, but the real issue is how few people have N95s or KN95s.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, a much more intelligent recommendation would be to wear tight fitting FFP2 masks:
https://www.usnews.com/news/he... [usnews.com]
Fauci likes his current gig (Score:2, Interesting)
... And it looks like Fauci and CDC are just repeating it ...
The new President is doing it. Fauci and the CDC like the new President. Fauci likes his current gig.
Re: (Score:2)
You're standing in the road. You notice a city bus is heading right for you. Do you get out your calculator and carefully compute the optimal escape route, then phone a friend to start testing your hypothesis? Or do you get the hell outta there before you get squished?
In spite of the claims of the nutters yelling for their freedumbs, wearing 2 masks won't make you turn blue and swell up like the girl in Willy Wonka, and it might actually help slow the spread of COVID while we wait for vaccines, so why not?
Re: (Score:3)
If you are so unfortunate as to have a bus hunting you then all bets are off.
Re: Why not three? (Score:2, Insightful)
No, if anything it's going to make people question the advice to wear a mask even more.
Hint: if you're going to keep changing your recommendations, insisting that the present iteration of your ever-changing advice is Science (and for all dissenters the shaming and namecalling and accusing people of mass murder and spreading disease) is just going to end up making science look bad in the eyes of the people whose cooperation is needed.
As far as I can figure, there are three valid explanations for why you may
Re: Why not three? (Score:4, Insightful)
Second, the only examples you can think of are reasons why people would wear two masks if they are already wearing N95 masks. Guess what? Most people are NOT wearing N95 masks. They are reserving those for the healthcare workers that benefit the most from the N95 masks and are making due with the next best options. If wearing two 50% effective masks gives them 90% effectiveness, that's a good thing. If your wife is wearing two masks to hide the fact she has access to N95 masks, that isn't the same as people wearing two homemade masks.
About the only thing I agree with you on is your last sentence. "Sars cov2 is the only virus known to man that can shut down your brain without even infecting you." But we probably disagree who that is referring to.
--
Re: Why not three? (Score:4, Interesting)
Where's the science in the two masks proposal?
The problem you have is that people wear shitty masks and don't wear them properly.
Plastering two instead of one does not increase effectiveness, because masks are not designed to be placed on top of another mask, they are designed to be placed on top of your snout.
That's all the "science" you need here.
Re: Why not three? (Score:4, Insightful)
Please keep in mind... one institution, not pier reviewed, could be completely bologna.
I thought it was interesting and kind of makes sense.
Re: (Score:3)
I am not too surprised by your conclusion, and I don't expect anyone who has experience with respirators and masks is.
The "wear double" is just another piece of pseudo-measures that the new boss is employing to mimic competence.
Re: (Score:3)
[citation needed]
Re: (Score:2)
"Learning that the UK mutation spreads more easily means science is changing."
Evidence points to the fact that what the proletariat call the UK mutation is "more adept" at cell entry and that transmission is unaffected.
Evidence also points out that very same mutation makes that particular variant strain more readily identifiable by the immune system and triggers a more effective and rapid immune response.
Evidence also points out that the additional mutation that the proletariat calls the South African mutat
Re: (Score:2)
Getting ones scientific information from the Daily Rag is and always has been an adventure fraught with peril because the Rag-Writers write for maximum sales and clicks, and not for the purpose of disseminating [scientific] information.
I agree. And all this "evidence" that you want us to accept as fact came from which Daily Rag?
My post was to support the opinion that as science learns and improves, most people don't distrust science just because it isn't the same as yesterday. I'm glad there is new evidence out there, people are questioning what it means, and are researching the facts behind the observations.
Observation = "Something strange is happening and I've seen a similar occurrence a few times before."
Evidence = "Here are some
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: if you're going to keep changing your recommendations, insisting that the present iteration of your ever-changing advice is Science
Yep. That's it right there. The earth is swimming in a ball of aether with the universe revolving around it. The best way to fight a virus is with a mask full of herbs. Humans still emit rays from their eyes that bounce of things. The world is actually flat. Homeopathy works.
We know this for sure because Science is a single absolute and no human knowledge has ever been superceeded.
I agree with you, because like you I also got a vaccine and that gave me both autism and brain damage from teh mercury.
IMHO, the exact opposite (Score:2)
> if you're going to keep changing your recommendations, insisting that the present iteration of your ever-changing advice is Science
It seems to me almost the definition of science is that you change your conclusions / predictions as more evidence becomes unavailable. Sticking to your first guess in the face of evidence to the contrary, because of a need to feel like you were right, is anti-science.
Sports fans continue to say their team is the best as that team loses *again*. Scientists tell us what the
Re: (Score:3)
Do you always defend any obvious utter nonsense by calling everyone an idiot who doesn't drink the authority kool-aid by the gallons? You know, instead of basic common sense. You already disqualified with your first sentence.
I said "assuming you're *not* either joking or a moron...", are you saying I should assume otherwise -- 'cause that just seems rude. Lighten up; have some Kool-Aid, it's Cherry. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense, plenty of healthcare workers wear N95 and have been free of infection.
Of course, and they're trained on how to wear it properly. For those less trained or unwilling to wear it properly, a second, larger cloth-type mask worn over the N95 may help things fit more completely. In addition, the secondary mask, which can be easily washed, may help keep the N95 cleaner longer.
We're doing five (Score:3, Funny)
Fuck everything, we're doing five masks [theonion.com].
Re: (Score:2)
It's all fun and games til your ears get ripped off by mask 6...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why not three? (Score:2)
Ah, you forget the cape. Handy for wiping down suspicious surfaces.
Isn't that what Darth is upto these days?
Re: (Score:2)
If two work better than one, why not three? Why not four?
The real joke was they can't even get people to wear one mask, and they now consider asking people to wear two?!
Two might very well work better than one, if everyone was already wearing one to begin with. What's the point of wearing two masks when people around you won't even wear one? This is as useful as optimizing the idle loop of the program.
Re: Why not three? (Score:2, Interesting)
Coumo has already started backtracking on the narrative and admitted that most deaths are the elderly with comorbidities. The cdc data already identifies as much and eventually this will be a non issue once governing bodies are no longer required to report every death as covid if there is a presence of the virus. At least they made it to February.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Its all about protecting Joe ... (Score:4, Insightful)
If two work better than one, why not three? Why not four?
Because the real goals here are:
1) To make Joe not look silly wearing two. Make it a thing so he can be a trendsetter, a "leader".
2) Attempt to remedy the problem of the fake/placebo fashionable masks made from the same material as your suit or jacket that seems so popular among the elite. This includes some White House visitors or people White House staff have to interact with.
If the fashionista would wear a cheap disposable surgical mask (2) would probably not be an issue. But they got to look good for the camera. So now the White House can make them wear an N95 under the placebos to protect Joe.
So its really about protect Joe either way.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be choking.
Re: (Score:2)
If two work better than one, why not three? Why not four?
Because laws of diminishing returns are a thing. But if you're worried I heard making the mask entirely out of plastic without any holes in it stops 100% of the virus getting through.
Re: (Score:2)
If two work better than one, why not three? Why not four?
Because N95 masks should have been the floor for acceptable masks, but instead we found the richest medical system on the planet not having enough supply to even sustain front-line workers a month into this pandemic, forcing citizens to use anything from old t-shirts to bandanas to make "masks". That's why. Perhaps re-enforcing multiple masks will convince the idiots out there to at least wear one mask.
At this point, the comedy of inept government versus this virus has gone into overtime.
At this point, corruption stands head and shoulders above everything else. You literally cannot screw t
Re:Why not three? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because that would be dumb and anti-science.
Many of the masks in use are inadequate. They don't filter properly, and are often designed more for comfort or fashion than for protecting people. Proper N95 surgical masks are expensive.
So wearing two cheap masks, especially a proper surgical style one on the inside and a decorative one on the outside, is a reasonable compromise. Doesn't increase cost much, but does have a decent effect on filtration.
Re: (Score:3)
No, duct-tape should be for the two-plus maskers.
There is absolutely no reason to plaster layers of masks on your face if one can do the job adequately, and I've seen very little evidence that you need more facial protection than a single, properly fit N95/FFP2/properly manufactured KN95 mask.
And that is only necessary in closed or packed places anywhere, and you'd be a moron to be in one for long in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen very little evidence that you need more facial protection than a single, properly fit N95/FFP2/properly manufactured KN95 mask.
Yes, but the problem is that many people aren't trained to properly fit/wear them, or don't for a variety of reasons. A second cloth-type mask on top can help with that and help keep the N95 mask cleaner longer.
Re: (Score:3)
What is the source of your belief that a second mask over an improperly placed first one will help?
Re:Give me a fucking break (Score:4, Insightful)
This is correct. These guidelines and requirements are only effective if the vast majority of people follow the advice. Even 30% non-compliance means it's almost pointless. Good luck getting even 50% of the American population to do the right thing, let alone 80%.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop projecting. Just because you associate with klutzes with poor education doesn't mean everybody is. Why do you keep wanting to disrespect a large portion of America's citizens?
Re: (Score:3)
Uh, the one mocking the stupidity of Cancel Culture, isn't the one being "triggered" here.
Intelligent humans complain about this idiocy because it does eventually infect one's ability to use simple facts and truth in society. Say anything you want to me, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Start mind-fucking public opinion with emotionally-charged drivel while attempting to completely dismiss facts with an obscene amount of childish hypocrisy? No shit a smart society has a problem with that.
People takin
Re: (Score:2)
Hahah. "Retard". You're funny. Good one. You're probably right and I'm a total idiot for believing that masks have any effect at all.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Give me a fucking break (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a sophomoric argument. If you really want to argue that mask-wearing doesn't matter, you need to use data that shows no change before and after the implementation of mask mandates and lockdowns in states which imposed such things - but anyone who's paid any attention at all to state week-by-week COVID-19 data has seen dramatic downward shifts in COVID-19 deaths that correlate quite well with the onset of those orders.
The snapshot of death rates from COVID-19 right now [statista.com] seems to loosely follow state po
Re: (Score:2)
That's a sophomoric argument.
Remember, this is /. ... :-)
Re:Give me a fucking break (Score:5, Informative)
So glad I live in a sane state that fully opened and ditched mask requirements a long time ago and has no intention of reinstating them.
Florida 123 deaths per 100000
New York 224 deaths per 100000
California 104 deaths per 100000
So being open and free or locked down and forced to wear a fucking mask in your house or driving down the road .... No fucking difference.
Your numbers aren't informative. (1) You focused only on deaths rather than looking at both deaths and cases; one would expect masks to have a strong impact on cases, while deaths would be affected by many other factors such as hospital bed availability and poverty. (2) You didn't control for population density. (3) You cherry-picked three examples.
I live in Seattle, where there's near universal mask wearing and things are fairly well locked down. If I randomly compare Seattle's King County (16 daily cases per 100k) to Miami Dade county (67 cases per 100k) then Seattle looks a lot better. I picked them as the two major cities in their state, with populations of the same order of magnitude, and (I don't know) but population density and affluence I guess seem similar. Those infection rates have translated directly into deaths - 1 death per 1800 inhabitants in King County, one death per 550 in Miami Dade. The comparison is tricky though - Miama has more retired folk hence more risk, but they're more affluent so lower risk.
Your example "New York vs Florida" is bound to be misleading since the two are so different so many respects beyond just the lockdowns.
I've cherry picked only two cases here, while you picked three. But the point is that neither of us has a remotely adequate command of the data to be able to judge whether mask-wearing and lockdowns help. There is someone who does have such a command of the data, though, and will give better conclusions than you or I -- namely, the CDC. I recommend to listen to what they say rather than content yourself with inadequate numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect logic.
Re: (Score:2)
If everyone is wearing a mask and if masks actually work then no lockdown is required. So clearly masks do not work.
Let me refactor that argument for you:
If everyone is wearing a condom and if condoms actually work then no sex is required. So clearly condoms do not work.
Re: (Score:3)
if (W and M) then -L
L
-(W and M)
-W or -M
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying it's not healthy for humans to live packed like sardines?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Give me a fucking break (Score:5, Informative)
Your numbers are off by a factor of 10 btw:
Florida is at 1,249 deaths per 100k
New York is at 2,265 deaths per 100k
California is at 1,058 deaths per 100k
It's also a bit deceptive looking at only the final cumulatives:
Of the 44k dead in NY, 30K happened before the end of May, they didn't hit 35k until December. They went from a peak with 1k dying in the state each day to 1k dying in a month. A factor of 30 improvement without vaccines or herd immunity. They got hit bad at the start because of various factors like high population density, worse medical treatment early on, and terrible advice from everyone from the state level to federal level since every layer of government held the stupid ball for a hot minute there.
Re:Give me a fucking break (Score:4)
Re: (Score:3)
You mean Florida? It has about twice as many deaths per capita as New York since July.
Yes New York screwed the pooch in March-April, but Florida has been screwing the pooch ever since then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we know, big fuckups. That was then, this is now. Incredibly, these people learned from their mistakes. Wish more people could.
Re: Why not four? (Score:2)
Re: Why not four? (Score:2)
Manufacturer 1: INFINIBLADE! ... INFINIBLADE ... PLUS ONE!
Manufacturer 2:
Re:Lost track of no mask, mask, double mask ... (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no one answer. Welcome to science, and especially to probability.
Is a 0.1% risk unacceptable to you? Then don't go outside, ever.
Is a 0.1% risk acceptable but not a 0.2%? Then go outside, distance religiously, mask up, maybe double-mask.
Is a 0.2% risk acceptable but not a 0.3%? Then only single mask and you can to a grocery store where you might accidentally get closer than that, etc.
(numbers made up, but you get the point).
The people who think that there is one right answer for the entire world are the people in error. However, it's NOT a case for entire personal evaluation of the maximum risk they are prepared to tolerate, because that affects others. Hence you have rules, laws and guidance to give you a baseline risk, and you need to modify as the science changes, as data is updated from those changes, as your own personal circumstances dictate, and so on.
Stop looking for the one right answer. It doesn't exist. Take the minimum general recommendation that you're given and stick to it like glue. Go further if you wish, but don't go lower than that.
So, as a Dr friend of mine currently is doing, if you think you're at risk or just don't want to evaluate the risk by the same criteria as the government, he's gone beyond on all recommendations - he's completely self-isolated with family who are completely self-isolated, their shopping is only done by one person, and always the same person, and always under strict controls, and then since day one of lockdowns he has been spray-bleaching the bags and food packaging when it comes into the home and leaving them somewhere hostile for the virus to die before they consume them. They are wearing gloves and masks and separating even inside the house they live in.
That's his choice. But the science, and official advice, quickly went from "we don't think masks are necessary" to "literally anything helps and you should do it" to "masks are compulsory" in a very short space of time. Two masks won't hurt anyone. One mask won't hurt anyone. No masks will hurt someone. So stick to at least whichever is the minimum of your local rules, laws and scientific advice (at least one mask when anywhere near other people than you already live with).
Going further won't hurt. Not going far enough will, even if not you.
Don't be a granny-killer. I don't care about the individual choosing whether to wear a mask or not, I honestly have no empathy for them at all. But when what you do affects others, bloody follow the advice. At least one mask.
Don't be the guy who gives, for example in the UK news recently, the honoured war hero who was recently knighted for raising GBP30m for the NHS, COVID and kill him just because YOU didn't wear a mask.