Home » Masks are a good example of why we don’t trust scientists or experts anymore

Comments

Masks are a good example of why we don’t trust scientists or experts anymore — 69 Comments

  1. Last month (at a time when a driver in NJ died in a crash, possibly as a result of wearing a mask alone in the car) Heather Mac Donald wrote an especially brilliant piece on “The Paranoid Style in Covid-19 America” in which she described the obviously deluded joggers and cyclists in NYC who felt compelled, from the hysteria induced in them by the MSM, to wear masks while exercising inside Central Park.

  2. I’m done with the mask except when around my mom and from my observations the last few days I would put the percentage of those wearing a mask at about 50% around here.

    A further observation that this is all show at the local grocery store up until a couple of weeks ago almost none of the checkers were wearing masks and now it’s apparently company policy that they all do.

    Why now and not a couple months ago?

    At this point it’s all theater.

  3. 8 glasses of water a day = no evidence

    Floss regularly = probably true, but no study has actually been done.

    Ventilators save lives = maybe, but no study has been done (most probably because doctors are so sure they save lives that they won’t deny them to a control group.)

    Learning styles = nope. Evidence is contrary.

    Head Start helps kids = benefits wash out within a year or two.

  4. Griffin, here in southeastern WA I notice a lot of people wearing masks at places like Lowe’s and grocery stores.

    One thing that cracks me up no end: in my office of 7 people where I’m the manager, 3 women wear masks intermittently every day. There is no clear pattern of when (or why) they’re off and when they’re on.

    I want so badly to ask “at what point will you no longer feel it necessary to wear masks at all in the office?” Like, is it when King J gives the all clear?

    Incidentally, all three are Asian, non-natives.

  5. gwynmir,

    Yes, I’m in the Tacoma area and I see much the same thing. At the grocery store yesterday like I said it was about 50/50 and no noticeable trend some older people without masks some with some kids with masks though most without and lots of people with mask pulled down below nose or even below mouth. It’s just show.

    This won’t hold as a gets hotter. My mom already complains about how she can’t breathe well with mask on and gets overheated what will it be like in July?

  6. In our town -population approximately 50K – we have 50 cases. I don’t think the masks are necessary given the low incidence. I’d prefer not to wear a mask, but the grocery stores I use are now requiring it. So, I carry one in the car, and put it on when I go in. Pull it down off my nose off and on – it’s really suffocating! I agree with Griffin’s mother on that score.

    I have a son and DIL who are paranoid about wearing the masks. They live close by, but won’t come by or do anything together due to the virus – or so they say. I think they’re carrying it to extremes. Daughter in law thing? I didn’t think we had a problem…but now I’m wondering!!

    I do wish I’d invested in Plexiglass stock before this all started!

  7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7108646/pdf/S1935789313000438a.pdf

    Davies A, Thompson KA, Giri K, Kafatos G, Walker J, Bennett A. Testing the efficacy of homemade masks: would they protect in an influenza pandemic?. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2013;7(4):413?418. doi:10.1017/dmp.2013.43

    Table 1 (page 414) is entitled:

    Filtration Efficiency and Pressure Drop Across Materials Tested with Aerosols of Bacillus atrophaeus and Bacteriophage MS2 (30 L/min)a

    In the table, results are listed for masks made from 10 different materials. Masks made from vacuum cleaner bags perform almost as well as surgical masks, which perform better than any of the homemade masks. Unfortunately, masks made from vacuum cleaner bags are uncomfortable. Luckily, many people are now selling homemade masks with a filter pouch. A piece of filter material, made from a vacuum cleaner bag, can easily be cut to fit into the pouch. The filter can then be easily replaced after use.

    Please note that this paper is a study of mask efficacy for the mask wearer. In other words, how effective is a homemade mask for protection against an infected person’s cough or sneeze?

    If the question is turned around the other way, then the issue of mask efficacy is much different. In other words, if you are asymptomatic, but infected, you may care about the people around you. If so, almost any kind of mask will help prevent your coughs and sneezes from infecting others. At least, that’s what the evidence from superspreader events indicates.

    By the way, the authors of this paper assert that masks alone aren’t effective in stopping an influenza pandemic. Below, I’ve copied their conclusion. Please note that they assume that flu viruses are transmitted as aerosols. For the coronavirus, superspreader events suggest that most transmission is via larger particles.

    Here’s the paper’s conclusion:

    “A protective mask may reduce the likelihood of infection, but it will not eliminate the risk, particularly when a disease has more than 1 route of transmission. Thus any mask, no matter how efficient at filtration or how good the seal, will have minimal effect if it is not used in conjunction with other preventative measures, such as isolation of infected cases, immunization, good respiratory etiquette, and regular hand hygiene. An improvised face mask should be viewed as the last possible alternative if a supply of commercial face masks is not available, irrespective of the disease against which it may be required for protection. Improvised homemade face masks may be used to help protect those who could potentially, for example, be at occupational risk from close or frequent contact with symptomatic patients. However, these masks would provide the wearers little protection from microorganisms from others persons who are infected with respiratory diseases. As a result, we would not recommend the use of homemade face masks as a method of reducing transmission of infection from aerosols.”

  8. Powered Air Purifying Respirator with Hood (and of course N95 filters). Pretty expensive for the average joe/jane, but not hot to wear and no breathing restrictions. The hood limits your peripheral vision but you can customize it with a Sharpie (many colors available)! Also they are kind of noisy when the blower is spooled up, but that would drown out any Karens that are prowling about.

    They were really much better than the rubber face piece respirators! Enjoy!

    https://us.msasafety.com/Air-Purifying-Respirators-%28APR%29/Powered-Air-Purifying-Respirators-%28PAPR%29/OptimAir®-TL-PAPR/p/000100003000001600

    It is all about safety after all.

  9. I ate lunch with a doctor friend this weekend, and he related a conversation that he had with an epidemiologist at their hospital facility. The epidemiologist said that wearing a face mask to block a virus is a lot like using chain link fence to stop mosquitoes.

  10. I don’t think masks or any other particular official edict or pronouncement are why people don’t trust experts anymore. We had decades of health related studies that contradicted each other and no one really minded.

    “The Death of Expertise” author Tom Nichols is why people don’t trust experts anymore. Not just him specifically but the type and behavior he represents. The explosion of the managerial/administrative bureaucracy, both public and private, has created a legion of people who achieve a level of status or expertise in certain limited areas. This legion then assumes for themselves status and expertise in ALL areas and respond to any challenge or failure with denial and contempt.

    Mike

  11. Here in Illinois Gov. Pritzker ( d – you stay at home while my family can travel to Florida ) has mandated that masks MUST be worn indoors in all retail establishments.

    We don’t feel that too onerous as we put them on just before we leave the car and take them off as soon as we get back to it. The supposed reason is to prevent the wearer from infecting others.

  12. Griffin:

    How many lives did Andrew Cuomo save by sending patients back to the nursing homes? I think it is less than one.

    Tuvea:

    There are masks (respirators) in wide use that have exhalation valves (those plastic knoby thingies. Those masks are much more comfortable for the wearer but provide no benefit to anyone else. No filtration of the breath exhaled by the wearer. This mask policy is bovine excrement.

  13. @Aggie:

    Re: “The epidemiologist said that wearing a face mask to block a virus is a lot like using chain link fence to stop mosquitoes.”

    Yes, I’ve heard that, too, but it sounds like he’s oversimplifying.

    We know anecdotally that super-spreading prominently occurs in closed locations with singing; e.g. funerals and choir rehearsals.

    Presuming those anecdotes to be representative of reality (rather than misleading), what would that mean? It seems to me the meaning is: SARS-CoV-2 can spread throughout a room most easily (or in greatest quantity) on strong exhalations or puffs of breath. A sneeze or cough is more dangerous than a word spoken quietly.

    That seems intuitive and fits with our understanding of viral spread, generally, which is why they say “cover your mouth (with your elbow) when you sneeze!”

    Now a mask can conceivably do 2 things:
    1. protect you from incoming viruses, if you’re not infected; and,
    2. protect others from a virus you have, if you are infected.

    The chain-link-fence analogy serves to debunk item 1, above: A cotton mask isn’t going to cover your eyes, and it’s not finely-woven enough to catch viruses as small as the Wuhan Flu. With the fence, mosquitos can go over or through; with the mask, viruses can likewise go over or through.

    But the chain-link-fence analogy doesn’t seem apropos for item 2, does it? Mosquitos fly under their own power; but viruses have to be propelled on air currents (if we’re talking air-transmission and not germy surfaces). If you can break the flow of air and make it be still, then the viruses surely don’t go as far.

    That, it would seem, is the usefulness of the mask.

    Of course, people who’re already sick shouldn’t be out-and-about. But some of them are asymptomatic, so they don’t know they should stay in.

    So, in the case of asymptomatic infected persons, it seems that wearing the mask would reduce their potential radius-of-spread. And that seems worth doing.

    Also, it means that if we speak to someone who doesn’t recognize us, and then breeze on by, there’s a decent chance they’ll say, “Who was that masked man?” Which is fun, for those of a certain age.

  14. The.most ridiculous aspect of this mask business is people wearing one outside. Any aerosol exhaled almost immediately disperses in even a slight breeze. And in sunlight the virus is toast due to the UV. Yet as of Wednesday, as CT “opens up” everyone has to wear a mask in public spaces even outside. We haven’t been since the start except in stores, etc.

    The amazing part is how proud the sheeple seem to be with their masks on.

  15. @gwynmir — I’m told that in Asian countries that it’s become a cultural thing that one wears a mask when one feels sick and think they might sneeze or cough. No external factors determine it, so that’s why you aren’t seeing anything.

    Assuming I’ve been correctly informed, anyway.

  16. Viruses aren’t transmitted as free-floating submicroscopic individual virus particles. The chain link fence analogy is ridiculous. I’m shocked that an epidemiologist would say something like that.

    Although certainty about transmission is still elusive, the coronavirus appears to be primarily transmitted within droplets or globules emitted by coughing or sneezing or kissing, or by vigorously singing, shouting, laughing, etc.

    It’s also possible, but less likely, that the virus may be transmitted by a finer aerosol emitted by the typical exhalation of breath, but good masks can also filter out an aerosol. Yes, of course, bad masks are worse than good masks. Does that really need to be said?

    Much of the to-and-fro over masks is a battle over straw men. Sadly, the so-called experts have indulged in this drama, but that doesn’t mean that ordinary people can’t find data, and make logical decisions based on that data. I’m no more of a mask nihilist, than I am a data nihilist. As bad as some models have been, I’m not even a models nihilist.

  17. “An improvised face mask should be viewed as the last possible alternative if a supply of commercial face masks is not available,” —

    Made our bi-weekly shopping trip today.
    Medical masks (not surgical, but what you see mundanes wearing around) were available at Walgreen’s and Ace Hardware, $30 & $38 respectively for a 50-count box.

  18. Most masks apart from heavy-duty medical ones, have a pore size of about 30 to 50 microns … if they’re actually made to be blockers of bacteria, germs and other tiny infectious critters. Guess the size of the corona virus? One-tenth of a micron. How big is a micron? Doesn’t matter because however large or small it is in everyday measures, the “holes” in the masks are 30 to 50 times larger than the virus folks believe or pretend to believe the masks will filter out. Chain link fence? Try hog wire fence. The push to wear commonplace masks and the supposedly legal “orders” of those politicians who think they’re somehow possessed of legitimate authority to make new laws by fiat is simply bull feces. The absence of a surge of infections – more accurately, the absence of a surge of COVID19 deaths – shows plainly that it is very highly likely that the virus was in the U.S. long before the “experts” believe (or at least before they say it was) and/or it is not as contagious as those same “experts” say or claim, and/or the lessons of the Diamond Princess passengers and crew are true for the larger world – short version: on a cruise ship for two weeks with infected passengers and crew only 20% caught the infection and only 7 (IIRC) died – not as deadly and not as contagious, and/or the virus has spread throughout the U.S. (for all practical purposes) and we’ve all been exposed to one strength or another of “viral load” and/or something entirely different that no one amateur or “expert” has figured out yet. Lesson: open up, do away with all the orders and other economy-destroying rules and let folks take what precautions they think they need to take without making the U.S. economy tank. We don’t want to imitate Venezuela, we don’t want a re-run of the 1929 Depression, we don’t want the politicians, bureaucrats and other vermin to get used to giving orders without legitimate authority. Will people still die of the new virus? Of course and they will continue to die from everything that has always killed humans, just not so many will die of starvation this winter and many fewer will die from stupid orders from politicians and their ilk. What? Exhibit One: order from NY Governor to make nursing homes take in patients infected with new virus. Need any others??

  19. Oh, and here is another reason we don’t trust experts, especially academic ones who haven’t updated the programming code for their model since I was in college more than 40 years ago.

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/05/never-trust-the-experts.php

    Imperial’s model appears to be based on a programming language called Fortran, which was old news 20 years ago and, guess what, was the code used for Mariner 1. This outdated language contains inherent problems with its grammar and the way it assigns values, which can give way to multiple design flaws and numerical inaccuracies. One file alone in the Imperial model contained 15,000 lines of code.

    Try unravelling that tangled, buggy mess, which looks more like a bowl of angel hair pasta than a finely tuned piece of programming.

    I am a reformed FORTRAN jock, and if someone had told me that was the language of this model, I would have told you on day 1 it should be ignored.
    Only academics can get away with using ancient technology like this, because no one ever loses their job if they are wrong.

    And for another notorious model, they didn’t even go with the “experts.”
    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/05/this-could-be-a-clue.php

    I’m not knocking college and post-doc coders (many of whom are pretty darn good), but I can guarantee that no actual epidemiologist or doctor had a clue how the Imperial model worked (or didn’t, apparently), and the (by now dead or retired) programmers who wrote it probably couldn’t tell you either.

  20. Ike:

    In most circumstances, when judging the usefulness of a mask, the size of the virus itself doesn’t matter very much. The virus is transmitted in much larger droplets that usually fall to the floor quite rapidly. The droplets that contain the virus are much larger than the pores of a good mask. Even if the virus is transmitted in a finer aerosol, the aerosol can also be blocked by a good mask.

    Also, if an asymptomatic infected person sneezes or coughs, even a poor mask will block the emission of droplets that contain the virus. This will protect uninfected people nearby. That would be inside. I don’t wear a mask outside. That would be silly.

  21. Yeah most of what I have read say most masks are ineffective. Especially the cloth ones. But they won’t necessarily increase your risk unless one gets careless either by touching their face or getting close to someone who have CV19 and is coughing. It’s interesting to see people struggle with them on and off on and off out on walks. Many are simple home made masks or bandannas. Not really effective. An exercise in futility perhaps.

    But I read some news stories about people making a big deal out of it. One woman in Dana Point claims it’s discrimination to not allow someone to shop without one and threatens a lawsuit. Another at a Trader Joe’s went on for 20 minutes until the cops were called. I’m not sure wearing a mask constitutes oppression. Any more than being asked to wear shoes is oppression. Calling the cops only got her more press – but really was more to stop her from yelling. Their store, their rules. Life goes on.

  22. Ike, many particulate masks, the kind sold at Big Box stores are N95. They’ll carry the rating on the mask. That rating means the mask will filter 95% of airborne particles down to .3 microns.

    I always wear a cloth face covering when I go shopping (put it on when I get out of the vehicle and take it off when I leave the store) as a courtesy to other shoppers. It’s like coughing into your elbow.

    But I don’t have the virus you might say. Probably you’re right. But there are enough asymptomatic carriers, and those who become symptomatic and can infect others for up to two days before showing signs of having the virus.

    That’s the problem, and the only way to help contain the spread is for everyone to wear a cloth covering when in close (and 6 feet is close enough to become infected) proximity to others. And you can’t go into most large stores without coming in close proximity of other shoppers.

    A friend of my wife started making masks and it’s a three layer cloth. It’s definitely not a N95 mask, but the object is just to slow down my exhaled breath. For that they work fine. Protecting me from the virus? Not a chance. They leak terribly around the edges.

    I am using N95 masks for the demolition part of my remodeling project for a fixer upper I bought last year, and I can tell for days if I start working without them on.

    I finally bought a particle counter, which measure down to about .3 microns and it’s amazing how sensitive they are and how quickly fine particles move around the house when I remove any debris.

  23. Why we are no longer trusting the experts — what we had here was a failure to communicate.
    Of course, Dr. Atlas is an expert too, just a different one.

    https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/498180-were-risking-national-suicide-if-we-dont-adjust-our-pandemic-response

    Adding to Dr. Fauci’s diagnosis: The critical case for ending our shutdown
    BY DR. SCOTT W. ATLAS, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 05/18/20 08:30 AM

    Policymakers and the public have not received several key messages that are critical to alleviate fear and guide a safe reopening of society. That has led to a gross failure in policy at the state level:

    Americans must try to accept what all doctors know: Exceptions exist with virtually every infection, but those do not outweigh the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Exceptions exist in this infection, some even tragic, including reports of an extremely rare disorder similar to the rare Kawasaki disease that occurs every year in about 2,000 to 4,000 children in the U.S. Public statements by scientists and the media that sensationalize these extremely rare instances are particularly harmful, because they instill undue fear and provoke extraordinarily harmful, misguided policies from people who lack a medical perspective.

    We must not forget that total lockdown — not the virus — is generating catastrophic harms. Restricting other medical care and instilling fear in the public is creating a massive health disaster, in addition to severe economic harms that could generate a world poverty crisis.

    Here’s the real failure: Public policy must never be one-dimensional. It can never be foisted on people without careful consideration of its consequences, including the harms from the well-intentioned attempt to solve the initial problem. True leadership demands far more than empathy and caution. Leaders are expected to rationally integrate the evidence, even if complicated, and then apply policies using common sense and a knowledge-based perspective. Conveying rational thinking is how to reassure the public and instill confidence in a chosen pathway.

    The total lockdown may have been justified at the start of this pandemic, but it must now end — smartly, without irrational, unnecessary requirements contrary to medical science, common sense and logic. The goal of the strict isolation was accomplished in the overwhelming majority of places. We have direct data on risk and extensive experience, individually and as a nation, with managing it, even as new cases arise. We know that gradually relaxing total isolation will lead to more infections, but that’s acceptable, given that we know whom to protect and this disease is not harmful to the vast majority of infected people.

  24. The bioweapon was designed to kill off a lot more people than this, but their plans failed. Next gen group meditation resolved the lethality problems in April 2020. The lethality reports that did come in, were due to Cuomo New York and Italians not treating people over 65. The suspicious number of deaths related to one area or service or age group.

    This was not a weapon created by Harvard or even Wuhan biolab. It was beyond them. Partially an accident as it crossed animals to human tissue, although they were experimenting on animals.

    SMEs have an intense tunnel vision and blind spot when it comes to not only their own field but also other people’s field that is related or what they have heard about. For example, conservatives understand the problems of academia, but if it is a conservative professor, then his academic field is gold, it is the other person’s field that is tainted. It’s a set of personal biases that doesn’t stop with politics. For a Leftist, of course, their President Hussein is a golden white/black boy, and Trum is the Orange of something or other. It’s the same phenomenon.

    SMEs also have a very erroneous set of data to rely on, much like a cult. The current understanding of psychology, physics, medicine, and virology is way backwards and obsolete. 2020 is the year where the health field gets inspected and outed. But there will be a time for the other fields soon enough.

  25. It is a good thing America or humanity’s systems are failing. Only by getting rid of the obsolete Old Guard, can the new alternative healthcare systems replace the toxic mess that currently exists. Burn it all down and start over? If that is what it takes, yes.

    If people wake up sooner, it will be less painful. Trum is already talking about Alternative healing modalities. These are the sound and light technologies. The public has no idea, of course, which is why Cabal SMEs look down from on high at the masses.

  26. Most masks apart from heavy-duty medical ones, have a pore size of about 30 to 50 microns … if they’re actually made to be blockers of bacteria, germs and other tiny infectious critters. Guess the size of the corona virus? One-tenth of a micron. How big is a micron?

    What we know of the spread of the virus suggests it generally requires proximity, enclosure, and some sort of media like droplets. The masks are one element in disrupting the spread.

    Latent in many of the complaints about stay-at-home orders and protective equipment is the notion that the virus just spreads by some sort of magic and that for some unfathomable reason doesn’t spread in Japan but does in New York City.

  27. Missing in this discussion about forcing your citizens to wear masks is…why the hell would you want to slow the spread of the asymptomatic strain? The whole point of slowing the spread is to ease hospitals etc, and that’s not happening even in our “hotspots”. Given what we now know, shouldn’t we be intentionally spreading the virus among healthyish people?

    They are tokens of virtue – ways to signal that you are “on board” and part of the club, and used by all others out of fear of shaming and social retribution (if not jail time for some places). They are non-binary gender pronouns in clothing form. You people are arguing about the efficacy so much you forgot to justify it in the first place.

  28. Art Deco:

    Wash your hands and think about it. Maybe there are more things involved in the spread of the China contagion than just the magic of a mask. Even in Japan.

  29. Brian E: So, .3 of a micron when the corona virus is .1 microns … even with the -95 mask, the pores in the mask are only 3 times larger than the virus, not 30. Same result.

    Several others: Droplets? Breathe in any droplets lately? If you did, you coughed your guts out and ejected it. Come on, face the fact: masks don’t work for this or most other virus types of similar size. In addition, if your mask stops the droplet, when it dries the virus – if any – from it will migrate into your lungs through the mask and vice versa for any droplet you expel, when it dries your breath propels the virus outward via the same oversized filter holes.

    Proximity, enclosure and some sort of media; sounds like the Diamond Princess crew and passengers’ experiences to me. About 3700 folks on the cruise ship, all were tested for the infection. Recall the results? About 80% were without symptoms and/or uninfected. Of those who were infected, 6 or 7 died before the release from by the Japanese authorities and IIRC about 3 more afterwards. Remember this is a population skewed toward the upper limits of human life expectancy. So we ought to open up and encourage people to live their lives, not choke us under unwarranted and unlawful orders of idiots and communists.

  30. New study shows masks work!

    “Experiments by a team in Hong Kong found that the coronavirus’ transmission rate via respiratory droplets or airborne particles dropped by as much as 75% when surgical masks were used.”
    “In our hamster experiment, it shows very clearly that if infected hamsters or humans — especially asymptomatic or symptomatic ones — put on masks, they actually protect other people. That’s the strongest result we showed here,” Yuen said.
    “Transmission can be reduced by 50 (percentage points) when surgical masks are used, especially when masks are worn by infected individuals,” he said.
    Hamsters have very similar enzyme receptors to humans, which is why they were chosen as the test animals for Yuen’s experiment.”

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/19/coronavirus-wearing-a-mask-can-reduce-transmission-by-75percent-new-study-claims.html

  31. Ike. If N95 respirators don’t work, why are they in use in every ICU unit in the country?
    If surgical masks don’t work, why is every person in an operating room wearing a mask?

  32. Thanks, Brian!
    We wear masks in Slovakia, including outdoors – tho I don’t believe they work.

    I’ve long believed that for indoor exposure, any infected person wearing a mask would have a much much lower infection rate on those around them.

    Imagine a sick, contagious person spending two hours each in two rooms. Each room with 100 other healthy people, of a variety of ages with same age distribution (50 or more aged 50 or more). In one room they wear a mask. In the other room they don’t.

    Even now we don’t know: a) how many folk get sick when the contagious person does NOT wear a mask. Probably similar to the cruise ship.
    b) how many folk get sick when the contagious person DOES wear a mask.

    I believe it to be about 70-80% fewer folk. If it’s 20 in the no-mask room, I guess 5 in the masked room.

    The “theater” about wearing a mask, even outdoors, is a pretty low cost theater for a pretty big reduction in infection in those cases where a contagious person does wear a mask indoors.

    If it was only and always a “mask indoors”, that would also be OK with me — but I’d also guess there would actually be more cheating.

    We should be doing a lot more studies with volunteer college students and those young healthy folk who are currently unemployed.

  33. Brian E – They do work, but cannot stop the passage of an infectious virus. ICU’s and operating rooms are entirely different environments from homes, factories, businesses of all sorts and other non-hospital locales. They can stop the immediate spread of various infections via airborne pathogens in closed and otherwise medically clean environments which are routinely and thoroughly re-cleaned. They are not effective against COVID-19 virus, as used by the general population and ordered by various governmental idiots … sorry, figures, around the nation.

    They are effective only as a propaganda tool to promote the “See, I’m your (insert the title of whatever politician is ordering the use of masks) and I’m taking vigorous and strong actions against this horrible killer.” narrative. Sub-text is “Vote for me next time!” Or if they’re bureaucrats, “Keep me in my cushy job where I don’t have to actually practice medicine.” Politically effective, yes; effective in slowing or preventing the spread of the disease? No.

  34. So what is one supposed to conclude from this article??? So many articles are like that here nowadays – talking about what other people say, but hardly a conclusive thought of one’s own.

    Too much of the discussion here in the comments is blue vs red signalling, sadly – Cornflour being a big exception.

    Wearing masks is about protecting others and less so about protecting yourself (unless you wear something like N95 mask or better with that purpose in mind).

    It is dead simple – Wear it when you are likely to encounter people in relatively close range (inside or outside).

    There is no protective magic in being outdoors.

    Indoors is more problematic with the internal airflow. But, like clouds, aerosolized infected particles do hang around for a period of time before breaking up.

    Proximity is the main factor.

    That is why distancing is another measure recommended.

    If you are not going to encounter anyone, or to be in a place that you can distance yourself – don’t worry about it!

    Those who ignore both, as we have seen in the news with some recent protests, are fools.

    Their argument for reopening loses credibility immediately.

    How do they know with certainty they don’t have the virus?

    Who the h*ll wants a reopening if crowds are going to be like them? Might as well go to an “infection party”.

    We can re-open only if we can trust that the vast majority of people won’t behave like those fools.

    All it takes is for a small percentage to be like those and we are back to the races on the spread.

    Arguing about the so-called “experts” is irrelevant, and just feeds the red vs blue narratives.

    Most partisans will find their own “experts” to quote anyway, as there are plenty of people willing to say what an audience wants to hear.

  35. We have found our own Karen and he knows so much he might even be an expert. Now listen up!

  36. Who?

    (Incidentally, I wince at the way the name “Karen” has been sullied; I’ve known three women named Karen — notice how, for clarity, I now have to phrase it that way, not “I’ve known three Karens” — and none of them were entitled complainers. Two, admittedly, were fair-haired moms, and I suppose they had stylish haircuts, although being male I can’t recall the details and don’t really know what counts as stylish for women’s hair. The third was a brunette whom I knew in college, who not only didn’t match the “Karen” stereotype, but subverted a variety of others: A very conservative Christian, she was unusually activist on environmental issues; rather brilliant academically, she had a thick rural Hickory, North Carolina accent and could have been cast in a movie as a farm wife raising chickens in the 1880’s. Anyway, none of the K-crowd I’ve met lived up to the current meme, a stereotype which far-better matches the two Melissas I’ve known.)

  37. @Ymarsakar: You say, “Only by getting rid of the obsolete Old Guard, can the new alternative healthcare systems replace the toxic mess that currently exists. Burn it all down and start over? If that is what it takes, yes.”

    Rrr, let’s careful about that. Robespierre comes to mind. I defer to no-one in my distaste for some of the dysfunction of our present moment, but those who would enthusiastically stamp out all vestiges of existing complex social systems in pursuit of a neat, clean, redesigned-from-scratch society aren’t immune from being sent to the guillotine.

    The COVID-19 lockdown has been more than enough of a severe shock to the system for this decade. It will have more than enough fallout (a mix of good and bad, no doubt) to keep all of us reactively readjusting for some years to come. In my more-vexed moments, I’m all for sending having Adam Schiff, James Comey, and the rest of the scoundrels decently hanged…and then broadening the list to include the leftmost 1/3rd of the university professoriate and administrators!

    But then sanity prevails: Civil War right now, with such a historically-illiterate and well-propagandized populace, would most likely result in something closer to Venezuela than to an enlightened Judeo-Christian-Greco-Roman Natural Law Republic. And the global upshot would be that the Chinese Communists inherited the earth. Just as “you go to war with the army you have,” so too “you go to the task of rebuilding civilization and culture with the people you have.” We need about 50 years of most kids being privately- or home-schooled towards a patriotic revival of the traditions of Christendom, full of Moses and Aristotle and Cicero, before we dare attempt any recasting of our cracked Liberty Bell.

    Until then, our best bets are a mix of patient gradual advances at the margins, where any advance is possible, and “standing athwart history, yelling stop!” wherever we seem to be in retreat.

  38. Big Maq,

    “We can re-open only if we can trust that the vast majority of people won’t behave like those fools.”

    Scientists creating a single vaccine that stops all illness and death is likely to happen sooner than waiting for the vast majority of people to stop behaving like fools; especially if we put you in charge of judging which behavior is foolish.

    You may not have heard, but Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery in 1865.

  39. Release the Karen or was it release the Kraken?

    Progressives discover slavery was and is really good for public health, as long as they are in charge.

  40. In reply to Om:

    You said,

    Masks with exhalation valves are the same as screen doors – no filtration of exhaled breath. What part of that don’t you understand?

    The part that makes such an observation relevant, I suppose.

    I wasn’t saying that either bandanas or store-bought masks achieved reduced spread from the wearer to persons within two feet of him. And I wasn’t saying that they achieved reduced spreading via filtration of viral particles, which are too small for them to filter anyhow.

    I was saying that if I, or another experienced singer, were to open my mouth and sing the chorus to Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believing” while you were standing ten feet away in an otherwise unventilated, still-air room holding a tuft of eiderdown feather, my singing would make that feather stir, and you might feel air stir on your face.

    And I was saying that if I were wearing a bandana over my mouth, and did exactly the same thing, you’d feel nothing, and the feather would be motionless.

    And that’s just singing. Don’t get me started on coughs or sneezes.

    In short, I think that unobstructed exhalations, with or without vocalizations, produce a sort of “jet stream” of air that moves particles carried within it for longer distances than normal air circulation does. (Hence the problems with funerals and choir-practices, in which lots of people are singing.) And I think such “jet streams” are broken up by fabric (or other porous) barriers, with the result that particles suspended in them don’t travel nearly as far, because air currents that aren’t coherently-directed tend to eddy and curlicue-out near their source.

    Of course I could be wrong; the choir/funeral thing is anecdotal, after all. But what I just said is, at least, consistent with the anecdotes and what we know of fluid dynamics. And, to respond to your point, it isn’t significantly impacted by the fact that viruses can slip in-between weaves of cotton. Unless there’s some other mechanism you were thinking of, which I haven’t considered?

  41. R.C.

    They (masks with exhalation valves) don’t protect the other person as well as non-valved masks. They are deemed just as good as any other mask by the authorities; there’s is a policy of appearances not protection. Do you get it now?

    I sing. I’ve been wearing various respirators for decades (with the required training and medical monitoring (biannual spirometry and ekgs). I know a little bit about it but I’m not an expert.

  42. Om,

    I certainly agree that “policy of appearances not protection” is commonplace governmental practice. The TSA groping grandmothers comes to mind: “Security Theater,” rather than Security.

    But, am I correct in thinking that you’re primarily or solely concerned about the masks with the exhalation valves? That you don’t disagree with my contention that masks probably reduce transmission, so long as I’m referring to valveless masks?

    I ask, because my original post on this topic was in response to Aggie quoting a doctor-friend, quoting an epidemiologist. The epidemiologist (if his words were reported correctly) was using the chain-link-fence analogy to describe “masks,” generally. Nothing related to valves was mentioned.

    So, when I replied, my reply was also in relation to “masks,” generally. And in fact my trips to the grocery store this week have allowed me to see lots of masked persons, but I don’t think I’ve yet spotted one of the valved masks. (I own one myself, but I use it while mowing the lawn. Allergies.)

    Anyhow the difficulty with the exhalation-valve masks hadn’t really been on my radar, since all I see in public is a bunch of bandanas-with-elastic.

    Now that you’ve raised the sub-topic of valved masks, I see your point: When you exhale, the pressure makes a little jet of air shoot out from the valve.

    Still, perhaps even that is better than an uncovered face, however marginally? After all, the uncovered face will shoot a jet-stream of air (with floating viruses) in a forward direction. My guess is that the valves mostly shoot exhaled air downward onto one’s chest, which shouldn’t be quite so bad…or are they on the sides? I know they don’t open forward.

  43. R.C.

    I posted a link to images of valved N-95 masks, there are lots of other face coverings with valves advertised. Some valved N95 have them in the front some on the side. I see them quite often but that’s just another anecdote.

    The masks may reduce transmission. More than being scrupulous about washing your hands? Why not recommend/require the wearing of gloves?

    And then there is the issue of what you do when you take off your potentially contaminated mask. Any guidance about that? Crickets. Appearances and virtue signaling for the asymptomatic or not infected. Can of worms, sorry.

  44. I think this has been asked her before, and I apologize if I missed an answer; but based on all the expert advice we are receiving homeless encampments should be huge areas of Covid infection, disease and death, right? But this is not the case, right? Or is it?

    Homeless folks are often ill, coughing, wheezing. Many do not social distance, but rather aggregate for long periods of time. It seems unlikely they would be disciplined in wearing masks properly. Is their illness and death rate high? If not, why not? Because they are outside?

  45. IIRC: A homeless shelter in Boston was tested, and it showed a fairly high rate of positives. Almost all the positives were asymptomatic. In fact, symptoms relevant to COVID-19 were slightly more likely to be reported by people who tested negative. I’m pretty sure that this was PCR testing only, so it would only have reported current cases as positive.

    I watch closely and don’t remember seeing any sort of follow-up as to whether the asymptomatic people who tested positive later got significantly sick. However, it’s becoming increasingly evident that a lot of asymptomatic cases are just simply asymptomatic – not presymptomatic.

  46. Rufus T. Firefly:

    That would be filed under the dog that didn’t cough, ask Dr. Watson, epidemiologist.

    Somehow that question has never been answered. Must have shipped the homeless to nursing homes? macabre.

  47. Om:

    Thanks for your reply.

    Regarding the link to photos: Gotcha. Clearly there are a few with forward-facing valves, and clearly that’d be unhelpful. The side-venting ones would be helpful, I guess, for people 10 feet in front of you, but perhaps endangering to people 3 feet to either side. The downward ones presumably would redirect viruses onto your own shirt-front.

    Re: “The masks may reduce transmission.” Fair enough; we don’t have scientific studies but my moderate recommendation of them was because I thought it probable they would reduce distant-spreading through strong exhalations. Seems you don’t strongly oppose that idea.

    Re: “[Would they reduce transmission m]ore than being scrupulous about washing your hands?” Probably not; I’m pretty big on hand-washing myself and keep both wipes and alcohol-gel in my car. I didn’t bring that up initially because I was only replying to Aggie’s post, which only mentioned masks.

    Re: “Why not recommend/require the wearing of gloves?” As with hand-washing, glove-wearing was off-topic; I was just replying to what was in Aggie’s post. Since you mention it, I’d put glove-wearing in a different category. To be sure, fingertips can carry germs, but so can glove-tips. If you would have gotten germs on your fingers, well, now you’re getting them on your gloves. Since (when we’re discussing masks) we aren’t discussing techniques for protecting ourselves, but rather for protecting others against germs in our own upper respiratory tracts, gloves seem a bit beside-the-point. You don’t cough through your fingertips.

    That reply is off-the-cuff on my part, though. Gloves aren’t mutually-exclusive with masks, and played no part (either way, pro- or con-) in my original reply to Aggie.

    Re: “And then there is the issue of what you do when you take off your potentially contaminated mask. Any guidance about that? Crickets.” Hmm. You seem to have taken my reply to Aggie and seen it as one part of a larger conversation I wasn’t really meaning to have. I wasn’t trying to offer guidance about taking off masks, either; I was just addressing the weakness in the chain-link-fence analogy.

    But, since you bring it up: I take my mask off and leave it in the car, in my driveway, on the dash, which is facing the sun. Next time I wear it, it’ll usually have baked for a day or three (I don’t get out much these days). From what I hear, that’s fully sufficient for killing SARS-CoV-2 on cloth. If I hear otherwise, I’ll probably start cycling through a few different cloth masks, dropping them in a hamper in the garage on the way in to the house, and then clothes-washing them on hot.

    Re: “Appearances and virtue signaling for the asymptomatic or not infected.” Well, to be sure, it’s mere appearances for the uninfected, but if they don’t know they’re uninfected, they can hardly help that.

    I guess virtue signalling is what really chafes: You and I and everyone else in America these days has had it “up to here” with folks carrying unearned attitudes of moral superiority purely on the basis of the tribal-markings they manifest through behaviors that cost them nothing, but gain them social acceptance.

    But in my area, most folks are wearing masks in the stores. They look to be folks of all types, “red and yellow, black and white,” rich, poor, with NRA or Coexist on the bumper. I don’t know what cheap virtue would be signalled, therefore. And mask-wearing (at least for me) is annoying and uncomfortable. So it doesn’t cost me much, but it costs me something, and I don’t think I’m getting any unearned social credit for doing so. I’m not conscious of any motive other than to not spread germs on my exhalations should I — improbably — happen to be infected. I don’t think I have some subconscious desire to “carry out my good works before men” by wearing the thing.

    Re: “Can of worms, sorry.” No problem! I’m not fiercely wedded to my opinion that masks can be of benefit, anyway. I just wanted to point out to Aggie that the chain-link-analogy was potentially misleading, at least for certain uses (protecting others). Now that you’ve mentioned the valve issue, I can be more precise: I still think the masks might have some benefit for protecting others, but one doesn’t want the valved kind, unless it’s venting back at your chest.

  48. “Civil War right now, with such a historically-illiterate and well-propagandized populace, would most likely result in something closer to Venezuela than to an enlightened Judeo-Christian-Greco-Roman Natural Law Republic. And the global upshot would be that the Chinese Communists inherited the earth. Just as “you go to war with the army you have,” so too “you go to the task of rebuilding civilization and culture with the people you have.” We need about 50 years of most kids being privately- or home-schooled towards a patriotic revival of the traditions of Christendom, full of Moses and Aristotle and Cicero, before we dare attempt any recasting of our cracked Liberty Bell.” – R. C.

    Good points.
    However, we do need to at least start making a mold for the casting.

    On the mask shibboleth, I had a nurse friend just today remark about how people she knows are dividing into two camps, which seem to cut across political parties, by imputing impure motives to the people who do the opposite of what they have chosen.

    https://babylonbee.com/news/study-finds-anyone-who-makes-a-different-decision-to-wear-a-mask-than-you-is-a-sheep

    PS “red and yellow, black and white” — haven’t sung that song in years, and it was always one of my favorites in Children’s Sunday School.
    We are all precious in His sight (in the old style meaning, not the Gollum one, of course).

  49. Here’s a study from 2009 trying to determine the benefit of masks for the spread of influenza in homes. The participants didn’t follow the guidelines and the study couldn’t draw any conclusions, and the discussion here is different regarding the use of face coverings to slow the spread of exhaled breath as a means to prevent infection, rather than protect the wearer from becoming infected.

    But they did make general observations about the use of masks.

    “During the height of the SARS epidemic of April and May 2003 in Hong Kong, adherence to infection control measures was high; 76% of the population wore a face mask, 65% washed their hands after relevant contact, and 78% covered their mouths when sneezing or coughing (28). In addition, adherence may vary depending on cultural context; Asian cultures are more accepting of mask use (29). Therefore, although we found that distributing masks during seasonal winter influenza outbreaks is an ineffective control measure characterized by low adherence, results indicate the potential efficacy of masks in contexts where a larger adherence may be expected, such as during a severe influenza pandemic or other emerging infection.”…..
    “During an influenza pandemic, supplies of antiviral drugs may be limited, and there will be unavoidable delays in the production of a matched pandemic vaccine (31). For new or emerging respiratory virus infections, no pharmaceutical interventions may be available. Even with seasonal influenza, widespread oseltamivir resistance in influenza virus A (H1N1) strains have recently been reported (32). Masks may therefore play an important role in reducing transmission.”
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2662657/

    The conversation about valves and N95 masks is really just a diversion. Valve or no valve the mask would slow the travel of exhaled air. The exhaust valve on these masks doesn’t open up fully, it just allow the air to exit with less pressure.

  50. Brian E:

    Have you ever looked at an exhalation valve on a respirator? Or are you just exhaling at lower pressure.

    Here are some clues a) they reduce breathing effort for exhalation and reduce the rebreathing of exhaled air (thus are more comfortable for the wearer) b) they bypass the filter media of the mask. Some diversion. Thanks for the gas.

  51. OM, I wear a 3M 8511 mask every day– I’m remodeling a fixer upper built in 1955– though the interior walls aren’t the tradition lathe and plaster, but a layer of sheetrock and stucco– creates lots of fine dust. The mineral wool insulation is also wicked. No asbestos, thankfully.
    The exhaust valve is in a cage, which limits how open the valve is on exhaust. I use them because it directs the air away from my glasses. The cheaper, non-valved N95 masks fog terribly. I tried the valved Harbor Freight masks (N95) but they don’t fit as well as the 3M masks.
    I wear a homemade cloth covering when in public though.
    I’m headed over to the house to work soon. I’ll do some experiments how far my exhaled air travels.

  52. The valve allows your exhaled breath to bypass the filter media, that is why there is less effort in breathing. I know about the fogging of the glasses with the non-valved N95s; have to wear them at Red Cross when donating platelets.

    OT Don’t know about your house but they say some drywall compound from back in the day may contain asbestos. Watch out for vermiculite. 🙁

    I use a North (Honeywell) 7700 half mask and rarely a North (Honeywell) 7600 full face at home (remodeling and yardwork). The North 7600 gave the best quantitative fit test results for my face in the occupational setting. So that’s what I bought them for my own use.

    I wear a non-valved N95 for this Corona show, but so far haven’t been to any stores that compel mask use for entry here in eastern WA.

  53. There is more technical information about masks on this thread than I’ve seen in any news report.

    Oh, and about those experts — they’ve changed their minds again.
    https://nypost.com/2020/05/20/cdc-now-says-coronavirus-does-not-spread-easily-on-surfaces/

    To be fair, they were erring on the side of caution until some testing could be done, but I guess I’ll toss that list I have on the front of my fridge and quit sequestering my purchases in the garage for 3 days.

    Bonus link: cover those noses, whatever kind of mask you use!
    https://nypost.com/2020/05/21/older-peoples-noses-may-make-them-vulnerable-to-coronavirus/

  54. I would not bet on him collecting that bet.
    Christians can be stubborn that way.
    https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/05/21/were-going-to-do-this-gods-way-pastor-stacey-shiflett-tears-up-cease-and-desist-order-during-sermon/
    “Either we have liberty to worship or we have permission to worship,” Shiflett said. “It has become abundantly clear that if we settle for permission, we will never have liberty again.”

    President Trump and AG Barr are backing the churches, so long as they follow reasonable guidelines, which most of them seem to be doing.
    The stories hit the news when the government or local LEOs exceed their reasonable powers to enforce limitations.

  55. Some cops, however, are getting with the freedom program.
    https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/05/18/merica-how-nj-police-handled-a-gyms-defiance-of-the-governors-stay-at-home-order-is-everything-watch/
    (Sister Toldjah)

    I look for how the police handled this situation today to happen in other parts of the country in the coming days and weeks. It’s already happening here in North Carolina, as police chiefs, county sheriffs, and even some district attorneys are pushing back hard on the governor’s stay at home order restrictions on church gatherings and businesses reopening.

    Police officers and deputies in particular have to work in these communities every day, and it takes away from the goodwill they try to foster with residents when they have to arrest people for exercising their Constitutional rights.

    Sheriffs even in Democrat-run states have been exemplary in tailoring their responses to local situations, usually by declaring their jurisdictions as “sanctuary” from the over-reach of their governors or mayors.

    If anyone ever proposes eliminating their independent structure and local election in order to fold them into the city or state police, then it’s really going to be time to check your stock of pitchforks.

  56. OM, I had the combination sheetrock/stucco/drywall compound tested for asbestos and it came up negative.
    Eastern Wa. I think I know that area. I’m in Moses Lake.

  57. A Rabbi ups the ante — and Godwin’s Law stands repealed.

    https://pjmedia.com/culture/rabbi-michael-barclay/2020/05/21/science-is-starting-to-scare-me-n412181
    BY RABBI MICHAEL BARCLAY MAY 21, 2020

    As a rabbi, I have always looked at patterns and historical repetitions, and I have to admit… I am starting to get truly frightened. Not of coronavirus, earthquakes, or an increase in crime.

    I am starting to get scared of “science”.

    Not the scientific method that I grew up with of hypothesis, proof, and conclusion. But this strange and questionable “science” upon which public policies are now getting based. It is starting to remind me all too much of other policies based on “science” in the past. Historically, when public policies have been based in the science of the time, the policies have often led to dangerous and painful results.

    When over 100 Chicago clergy opened their doors this past weekend to provide the essential services of spiritual nurturing through prayer in defiance of the stay-at-home order of Illinois Gov. Pritzker (D), the governor tweeted that he had “sympathy for leaders struggling with those choices — but not for those so intent on disregarding science & logic that they put people’s lives at risk.”

    Governors Cuomo (D-New York) and Newsom (D-Calif.) have imposed draconian measures of quarantine and isolation based on “science” and in the process have determined that cannabis clubs, abortion clinics, and bike shops are all more “essential” than religious institutions.

    The World Health Organization claimed on April 6 that science had determined that face masks were unnecessary for healthy people, and then determined by May that the science showed that everyone should wear a mask. Mayor Garcetti of Los Angeles has determined that the science shows that everyone needs to wear a mask as soon as leaving the house to prevent further spread of the virus. [NOTE by AS: plenty of current stories now dispute this assertion.]

    Here in Ventura County, Calif., Dr Robert Levin has made it clear that the county will be hiring over 50 new staff to track people who have been exposed to COVID-19 and quarantine anyone who has been exposed, even removing them from their home environment (he tried to walk back his words a few days later, but you can listen to his actual words here. Dr. Levin’s science-based procedures are for a county that has fewer than 1/100 of one percent fatalities.

    History shows us these same types of isolation practices and singling out of individuals or groups based on “science” before.

    The policies of Messrs. Newsom, Cuomo, Garcetti, Levin, and their supporters are all based in the current scientific understanding of COVID-19. Although there are many scientists who disagree with their understanding, and although the understanding of this virus is constantly changing due to new information, these leaders are insisting upon basing public policy on fears based in “science.” And their draconian policies are not only intellectually inconsistent (ten people are allowed to gather in a crowded liquor store but not in a church sanctuary that can hold 500 people), but far too reminiscent of the policies based on the science of the day that ultimately led to the persecution and death of millions.

    Is there really a difference between isolating people because they have been exposed to COVID-19 for the benefit of the masses and isolating Jews into European ghettos? What is the qualitative difference between the State hiring people to report and enforce quarantining those who have been potentially exposed to the virus, and Nazi soldiers being conscripted to find the “sub-human” Jews and mark them with a yellow star? All are based in “science” and enacted to protect the nation. And all these practices are the definition of evil.

    George Santayana famously said, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Some truths are eternal, but real science is always growing and evolving. To base public policy on “scientific truths” is to emulate the behavior of the slave owners, xenophobes, racists, and Nazis. Our political leaders need to remember history in order to avoid repeating it. The best intentions of creating safety through public policy based in science can all too easily morph into the horrors of the Holocaust.

    If our leaders do not recognize the danger of the policies they are enacting based on today’s science (knowing that the most basic medical understandings of today may radically change tomorrow as new studies are reported) it is incumbent upon “we the people” to help them recognize the danger of their path through petitions to those policy makers, in the court system, and even through peaceful civil disobedience if absolutely necessary.

    We all need to acknowledge and emulate the courage of the 100 pastors in Illinois and of the 700 pastors in California who on May 31 will be opening their church doors in peaceful defiance of Gov. Newsom’s stay-at-home orders.

    Two leaders of the past give us words to remember during these challenging times. Two thousand years ago Rabbi Hillel taught: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”
    Centuries later, Benjamin Franklin was asked after the 1787 Constitutional Convention if we had a republic or a monarchy. He replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

    May we all remember to be for both ourselves and others. To guide our leaders into creating public policies that are just, righteous, and not based on the whims of an ever-changing science, and to act now to prevent a history of ugliness from repeating itself.

    If not now… when?

  58. Brian E;

    Breathe easier! Benton Co. here you can probably guess where I did most of my on-mask work.

  59. This pandemic has made it clear that Science is now their God, Scientists are their Priests and Data is their Scripture.

  60. om, my wife administers an assisted living facility and they’re been on pins and needles.
    Just devastating once the virus gets inside one of these facilities.
    Now, as the worst is over, the state is going to require testing of staff and residents.

  61. Streiff at RedState has some choice words for the CDC — at which he used to work, which was news to me.
    https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/05/21/cdc-changes-its-mind-about-wuhan-virus-transmission-and-that-tells-you-all-you-need-to-know-about-our-current-mess/

    Sadly, this kind of stupidity is par for the course for CDC. CDC has and does some great things but it is a failed organization that is currently living on its old press releases. What it would rather do is be a Karen-esque nanny brigade that tells you how to live and deal with political issues like health disparities, and obesity, and guns than deal with disease. When it does get put on the spot in an infectious disease crisis, it fails. If you go back to the response to the anthrax attacks that happened around 9/11, particularly the attack on the Brentwood (DC) USPS facility, you find blinding incompetence is the order of the day. (Making as much disclosure as I can comfortably make, I was in CDC, in a Center that was directly tasked with responding to the anthrax at the time and had a ringside seat at this particular circus.)

    From the start, this crisis has been driven by fanciful models hawked to credulous reporters and pushed by people who wanted to damage President Trump in an election year. The actual scientific knowledge on this virus was minimal in all aspects but people who should know better saw personal and institutional gain in acting as though this was Armageddon.
    ..
    When this is all over, we’re going to see that the people we relied upon to advise policymakers were idiots…on a good day. The sad thing is that because they are scientists, they will be immune from all the consequences of their imbecility and hubris and when the next crisis happens, we’ll see these same morons calling the shots again.

  62. This thread should just be a standing feature because I find a new story every day that undercuts our experts, or at least the government’s interpretations thereof.

    Not knocking anyone for starting out overly cautious, given the fake models being used (maybe TPTB ought to vet those things before they are needed..), but it’s hard for anyone to make sense of the constant changes, since ALL of them are announced as being definitive rather than preliminary, at least by the time they make it to the Press and Public.

    So – maybe the experts were okay to start, but the Politicians and Media are not to be trusted?
    And, if we couldn’t trust them THEN, how can we be sure we can trust them NOW?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8339837/Government-scientist-says-2m-social-distancing-rule-based-fragile-evidence.html

    By SAM BLANCHARD SENIOR HEALTH REPORTER FOR MAILONLINE
    PUBLISHED: 07:16 EDT, 20 May 2020 | UPDATED: 16:41 EDT, 20 May 2020

    Government scientific adviser says Britain’s two metre social distancing rule is unnecessary and based on ‘very fragile’ evidence
    Lockdown rules mean people must stay at least 2m (6’6″) apart from each other
    But the science behind the exact measurement is ‘fragile’, expert says
    The World Health Organization recommends a minimum of one metre
    Government adviser said he was told UK ‘doubled it to be on the safe side’

    On the other hand, I no longer trust WHO at all, though I’m sure there are nice people there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>