I’m sure I have an unpopular opinion but does anyone else feel like the mass push for facial coverings and masks has very little benefit? Think about it (I know this is immature, so forgive me) if a fart can go through underwear and a pair of jeans... can’t good ol’ Rona go through a piece of cotton? Not only that, the general public is not educated in how to wear PPE and are not wearing the masks or gloves correctly.
Frankly... mask and gloves provide them with a false sense of security.
As nurses, we are keenly of what’s clean or sterile so we can do a pretty good job navigating ourselves in public during this pandemic. However, not trying to be disrespectful or anything, watching the public on with their masks and gloves on is quite entertaining to say the least. I was in Whole Foods recently and you can see who’s a medical professional from a mile away as it’s obvious to see which hand they’ve designated as their “dirty hand” and how they hold they hand in resting position while grocery shopping! If I can smell my coffee through my mask as I pick up a new bag from the shelf and toss it into the cart, then Rona ain’t going to be fooled by my mask. I’m not willing to waste an N95 for grocery shopping. I just don’t see the need for a mask out in public unless you have a new or sudden change in cough or are immune compromised. We will always have rouge individuals who will defy advice and not wear a mask when sick, but I’m talking about the general public. I do see the benefit when you have a cough as it will stop the droplets from traveling further. But just breathing in and out can transfer this virus... I don’t know how a mask will provide protection from this. I live in a fairly wealthy area where almost EVERYONE is wearing a mask in public. For those who are not wearing a mask, is it because of a conscious decision, typically unrelated to financial reasons.
My case is: I don’t see the efficacy of surgical/homemade masks against coronavirus for healthy individuals.
All they can do, at best, is reduce the distance of droplets. If you cover your mouth, you do the same thing, and that’s in a sick person, not a healthy one. There’s also evidence that mask wearing increases illness from people touching their face more, adjusting them, not wearing them properly, reusing them...a warm, moist environment is the perfect micro lab environment....it’s an idiotic recommendation for something with such a low mortality rate. Especially Idiotic as a recommendation for children as their risk rate is so minuscule.
All they can do, at best, is reduce the distance of droplets. If you cover your mouth, you do the same thing, and that’s in a sick person, not a healthy one. There’s also evidence that mask wearing increases illness from people touching their face more, adjusting them, not wearing them properly, reusing them...a warm, moist environment is the perfect micro lab environment....it’s an idiotic recommendation for something with such a low mortality rate. Especially idiotic as a recommendation for children as their risk rate is so minuscule.
Preventing the asymptomic infected from spreading it is a huge benefit.
Also as we’ve all firsthand witnessed “such a low mortality rate” still leads to massive overwhelm with critical patients when enough people get infected.
Here’s a couple. Also interesting to note that since mask wearing became popular, hand washing, which is very important, is viewed as not as necessary. I’m sure you can look and find more if you want to, but you don’t need a study to know that cloth and surgical masks do not/cannot filter viruses. The particles are so much smaller than the viruses. A lot of the mask manufacturers have that actually printed on the box if you look at the box itself. Also interesting to note is that it’s just a theory that asymptomatics can transfer disease, and there is a study out there that looked at an asymptomatic that did NOT infect 455 people he came in contact with. Also important to note is the majority of facilities are not and have not been overwhelmed, thus the significant issue of layoffs, furloughs and hiring freezes.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
4 hours ago, blue_bug said:
All they can do, at best, is reduce the distance of droplets. If you cover your mouth, you do the same thing, and that’s in a sick person, not a healthy one. There’s also evidence that mask wearing increases illness from people touching their face more, adjusting them, not wearing them properly, reusing them...a warm, moist environment is the perfect micro lab environment....it’s an idiotic recommendation for something with such a low mortality rate. Especially idiotic as a recommendation for children as their risk rate is so minuscule.
So you are arguing that masks aren't effective? What other contagious do we deal with regularly that has caused so much death and suffering...with that low fatality rate you speak of?
Recommendations to protect children from the virus are not idiotic. Perhaps you just don't value all children and prefer to ignore their unique risk and expression of disease...most patents aren't that cavalier about such matters.
So you are arguing that masks aren't effective? What other contagious do we deal with regularly that has caused so much death and suffering...with that low fatality rate you speak of?
Recommendations to protect children from the virus are not idiotic. Perhaps you just don't value all children and prefer to ignore their unique risk and expression of disease...most patents aren't that cavalier about such matters.
That’s extremely rude and condescending and I will not continue a conversation in this manner. I’m sorry that the science doesn’t match your level of panic and fear. ?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 minute ago, blue_bug said:
That’s extremely rude and condescending and I will not continue a conversation in this manner. I’m sorry that the science doesn’t match your level of panic and fear. ?
I asked you questions and challenged your thinking. If you can't handle that maybe you shouldn't participate in a forum where others get to join in.
Since you can't show that I have made a statement in panic or fear, I will call baloney out loud once again. Feelings =/= fact
Here’s a couple. Also interesting to note that since mask wearing became popular, hand washing, which is very important, is viewed as not as necessary. I’m sure you can look and find more if you want to, but you don’t need a study to know that cloth and surgical masks do not/cannot filter viruses. The particles are so much smaller than the viruses. A lot of the mask manufacturers have that actually printed on the box if you look at the box itself. Also interesting to note is that it’s just a theory that asymptomatics can transfer disease, and there is a study out there that looked at an asymptomatic that did NOT infect 455 people he came in contact with. Also important to note is the majority of facilities are not and have not been overwhelmed, thus the significant issue of layoffs, furloughs and hiring freezes.
How did you evaluate and choose those sources out of all the available research? The first link is a >5 year old study looking at healthcare workers specifically, not the general population. I don't think anyone is arguing that HCWs should be wearing cloth masks.
The second study you link is a non-peer-reviewed preprint with an n a fraction of the meta-analysis I posted above that did not validate those results.
For your third, reducing public perception of the importance of hand washing is a concern, but is it the masks themselves that are causing the problem or is our messaging not clear, and does a messaging problem and incorrect usage alter the benefit of properly used public face masks?
For the study on asymptomatic carriers being unlikely to be contagious, that's encouraging, because at least 7 previous contact tracing studies have found it to be transmissible while the patient is asymptomatic. So we know it CAN be transmitted by asymptomatic carriers, but knowing the likelihood is important. When it's a novel virus that none of us have any immunity to I'd want more than an n<500 to determine risk when it is established that asymptomatic transmission is possible.
What are your thoughts on the meta-analysis I posted?
I asked you questions and challenged your thinking. If you can't handle that maybe you shouldn't participate in a forum where others get to join in.
Since you can't show that I have made a statement in panic or fear, I will call baloney out loud once again. Feelings =/= fact
Actually, you accused me of not caring about children and ignoring risks (emotional response as well as rude and inaccurate). I have already provided links for the science, which you have not done, showing your opinions are not fact based. If you call that challenging thinking, there’s really zero point in conversing with you. The only question you asked, you can easily find the answer to by looking, but there are many many more diseases that cause far greater death and suffering than covid does. Here’s one simple graph, but you can look for yourself if you’re actually interested. There is a very low complication rate especially if you take out those in nursing homes and those with comorbids. Now I really am done with responding to you as you show great difficulty in responding civilly and that’s my right to not engage and continue conversations such as this, and that does not mean I don’t have the right to post. But thanks for continuing the condescending baloney.
For the study on asymptomatic carriers being unlikely to be contagious, that's encouraging, because at least 7 previous contact tracing studies have found it to be transmissible while the patient is asymptomatic. So we know it CAN be transmitted by asymptomatic carriers, but knowing the likelihood is important. When it's a novel virus that none of us have any immunity to I'd want more than an n<500 to determine risk when it is established that asymptomatic transmission is possible.
Adding the links to the studies establishing asymptomatic transmission:
How did you evaluate and choose those sources out of all the available research? The first link is a >5 year old study looking at healthcare workers specifically, not the general population. I don't think anyone is arguing that HCWs should be wearing cloth masks.
The second study you link is a non-peer-reviewed preprint with an n a fraction of the meta-analysis I posted above that did not validate those results.
For your third, reducing public perception of the importance of hand washing is a concern, but is it the masks themselves that are causing the problem or is our messaging not clear, and does a messaging problem and incorrect usage alter the benefit of properly used public face masks?
For the study on asymptomatic carriers being unlikely to be contagious, that's encouraging, because at least 7 previous contact tracing studies have found it to be transmissible while the patient is asymptomatic. So we know it CAN be transmitted by asymptomatic carriers, but knowing the likelihood is important. When it's a novel virus that none of us have any immunity to I'd want more than an n<500 to determine risk when it is established that asymptomatic transmission is possible.
What are your thoughts on the meta-analysis I posted?
I’ve had a bunch of appts today and haven’t been able to read yours, but I will when I get 15 uninterrupted min to myself!! Those are just ones that I’ve seen recently without having to spend much time, but I do feel they are still worthwhile. If they aren’t helpful for healthcare workers who are trained in infection control, good practices such as not touching the face/mask, hand washing, then it certainly isn’t going to be any better in the general public!! But it’s just basic fact that those masks cannot and do not filter viruses. ?♀️
Actually, you accused me of not caring about children and ignoring risks (emotional response as well as rude and inaccurate). I have already provided links for the science, which you have not done, showing your opinions are not fact based. If you call that challenging thinking, there’s really zero point in conversing with you. The only question you asked, you can easily find the answer to by looking, but there are many many more diseases that cause far greater death and suffering than covid does. Here’s one simple graph, but you can look for yourself if you’re actually interested. There is a very low complication rate especially if you take out those in nursing homes and those with comorbids. Now I really am done with responding to you as you show great difficulty in responding civilly and that’s my right to not engage and continue conversations such as this, and that does not mean I don’t have the right to post. But thanks for continuing the condescending baloney.
Why would we "take out" part of the population with comorbids or in nursing homes in looking at risk? When we're concerned about a population that includes people in nursing homes and with comorbidities (and the comorbidities are common and widespread) how is that not relevant?
Why would we "take out" part of the population with comorbids or in nursing homes in looking at risk? When we're concerned about a population that includes people in nursing homes and with comorbidities (and the comorbidities are common and widespread) how is that not relevant?
That was in response to the risk to pediatrics, so it’s very important in evaluating a pediatric risk.
Wuzzie
5,238 Posts
Cite your sources please.