General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRedfield:"This face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID..."
Link to tweet
Trump is not going to be happy.
greatauntoftriplets
(175,729 posts)bamagal62
(3,244 posts)riversedge
(70,077 posts)malaise
(268,693 posts)at a Senate Hearing to boot
PSPS
(13,579 posts)Actually, it's "more guaranteed to protect you, senator." It would have been even better if he also said, "than when I take a COVID vaccine rushed out by trump for political purposes."
That's the fatal flaw and contributes to the false notion that "I'm a big strong big MAGA!1! I'll choose what risks I take! It's MY choice!!11! Get gubmint off my back!! MAGA all the way!!!111!!1" The mask's primary purpose is to contain the droplets you emit so the people around you aren't exposed to them. The mask's effectiveness at protecting the person wearing it is minuscule by comparison.
ProfessorGAC
(64,852 posts)Wearing a mask provides nearly the same protection to the wearer as it does to others.
Not quite as good, but very high.
IIRC, the numbers were 90%+ and 80%+.
The study I read (I forget who published it) was looking at a person wearing a mask around an unmasked infected person & an infected masked person around unmasked people unaffected
That well explains the effectiveness in inhibiting community spread. Better than 1 in 10 in times better than 1 in 5 brings us to at least 98% effectiveness.
It's foolish to believe any vaccine will be >98% effective.
So, I think Redfield is dead on.
I think it a better selling point to say wearing a mask protects you and protects other people even more.
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)one needs at least 1,000 cov2 particles to get infected. Most infections are through small droplets that masks will stop nearly entirely and a lot of whatever is left in aerosol form, will also be blocked. In many regions of CA, there is high mask compliance rate and the ongoing transmission was explained to be due to family bbqs and family events with extended family where masks are not worn.
As much as I like Fauci, I will never forgive him saying as late as March, 8: there is no reason to be wearing masks. This was in stark contrast to health officials in countries that actually had experience with this type of pandemic - Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, etc. Those were very clear back in January about masks. I like Fauci for everything else he has done but because i hold him in such high regard, I have high bar for him, and what he said was grossly anti-scientific. This is personal for me, because I advised my employees not to wear masks back in March when they wanted to. I quickly changed guidelines later buy I will never forgive him that.
onlyadream
(2,165 posts)He really dropped the ball there and just proved that he's not infallible. That was the worst thing he ever said. I don't know if he just wanted to make sure the front line workers had masks, so he said this to keep us from hoarding - whatever, it was manipulative and now it's political (the LAST thing it should ever have become).
The interesting thing is that if Trump embraced masks, instead of dying on that hill, this story would be so much different and he would have a much better chance at beating Biden. His own stupidity bit him in the end.
PSPS
(13,579 posts)AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)magats would not listen to fauci if you paid them but the majority of the country listened to him and not trump. I blindly trusted Fauci when he said what he said at the most critical time at onset of widespread, the only time you could truly contain the virus. And he said it with great conviction. I ignored health officials from other countries as I trusted Fauci more. CDC went even further, adding that masks are far more dangerous than no masks because wed be touching our faces more.
I understand that it doesnt require much brain now to figure out that masks are necessary but this is precisely why experts are so important at the beginning of pandemic, to prevent it. And the single most important thing all Americans should have done from February is to wear masks. Not magats, if just we, dems, started wearing masks by millions in February, tens of thousands of deaths would be saved. Hong Kong and Taiwan did. I still listen to Fauci but no longer trust and need to listen to foreign public health officials too. A mistake that may have caused thousands to die is not an easy thing to forgive.
onlyadream
(2,165 posts)They all told her (in early March) that masks work and to not listen to anyone who says they dont. They ALL had masks on. The Chinese are used to masks and wear them out of curtesy when they have a cold.
PSPS
(13,579 posts)I have yet to see such quantification of "number of particles" to become infected. I'd like to see such a statement in a qualified study.
Also, you are right that most infections are from "droplets," but that includes aerosols. The type of mask most people are using are poor at blocking those from being inhaled. The virus itself is smaller than the mesh of almost every mask. And, when the wearer inhales, most of that air is coming around the mask, not through it.
PSPS
(13,579 posts)Most people aren't using such masks. In fact, they're very hard to find.
ProfessorGAC
(64,852 posts)That article said no such thing, and the notion that a mask offers no protection to the wearer is illogical and doesn't square with the physical chemistry.
Electret fibers make an N95 more effective, for sure. It's a whole other physical chemistry mechanism in play.
But, going from excellent protection to almost none is nonsensical on its face.
On Edit: the "mask protects the user" finding was by researchers at University of California at San Francisco.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)are not as effective as others. N95 is tops, but a 2-ply cloth mask that fits over a persons nose and mouth properly is around 98% effective if two people in close contact are wearing one, 70% effective if only one person is masked.
A very recent study (that is being expanded) implies that mask wearing actually performs a similar function as a vaccine, the mask reduce the viral load that a person takes in to a level where the body can confront the virus and build immunity without a person getting sick.
IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)We're all liberals here. Always verify everything.
Nevilledog
(51,005 posts)PSPS
(13,579 posts)GopherGal
(2,007 posts)That's been a problem with doing only take-out dining, I haven't been able to get my medical advice.
Very grateful to Hair Drumpf for passing along the advice from his waiters!
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Ohhh, the trials of life!!!!
thesquanderer
(11,972 posts)...the simpler masks most of us use do more to protect infected people from spreading than they do to protect the wearer (though they do protect the wearer some as well).
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)It found that any mask 2-ply and better protects the wearer also and technically performs a function similar to what a vaccine does.
thesquanderer
(11,972 posts)It depends what the efficacy of the vaccine is. If the vaccine provides 60% protection, that's a lower bar for a mask to meet, compared to a vaccine that provides 90% protection. We don't know yet what that figure will be. (Not that the percentage figures are really directly comparable, but just to illustrate the rough idea...)
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Think about the difference between becoming mildly sick and dying. I read an estimate that if Trump had fully embraced masks at the outset, something like 80,000 of the dead Americans would be alive.
China, South Korea, Japan have pretty extensive experience with using masks. When the SARS-COV-2 hit, all three went to using mask extensively, even as they were trying to figure out exactly how the virus transmitted. Trump ADMITTED that Yi told him in a phone call that it looked certain that the virus transmitted by air and was very dangerous - I can promise you that if a President Hillary Clinton, President Joe Biden or President Obama had gotten the same earning, Americans would have been asked to wear masks to protect others and themselves, from the outset.
Poiuyt
(18,114 posts)I'd like to learn more about that.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)My DU post from a few days ago:
From The Telegraph. Face mask wearing may act as a sort of vaccine.
In that the mask increase the likelihood that a person will take in a low dose that activate the bodys immune response without the person getting sick.
Link:
https://apple.news/An9uNFDcwSTi7dD5kk9hCrg
......................
The article:
Global health
Snip:
Face masks could be giving people Covid-19 immunity, researchers suggest
Face masks may be inadvertently giving people Covid-19 immunity and making them get less sick from the virus, academics have suggested in one of the most respected medical journals in the world.
Snip:
The commentary, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, advances the unproven but promising theory that universal face mask wearing might be helping to reduce the severity of the virus and ensuring that a greater proportion of new infections are asymptomatic.
If this hypothesis is borne out, the academics argue, then universal mask-wearing could become a form of variolation (inoculation) that would generate immunity and thereby slow the spread of the virus in the United States and elsewhere as the world awaits a vaccine.
It comes as increasing evidence suggests that the amount of virus someone is exposed to at the start of infection - the infectious dose - may determine the severity of their illness. Indeed, a large study published in the Lancet last month found that viral load at diagnosis was an independent predictor of mortality in hospital patients.
Wearing masks could therefore reduce the infectious dose that the wearer is exposed to and, subsequently, the impact of the disease, as masks filter out some virus-containing droplets.
Snip:
If this theory bears out, researchers argue, then population-wide mask wearing might ensure that a higher proportion of Covid-19 infections are asymptomatic.
Better still, as data has emerged in recent weeks suggesting that there can be strong immune responses from even mild or asymptomatic coronavirus infection, researchers say that any public health strategy that helps reduce the severity of the virus - such as mask wearing - should increase population-wide immunity as well.
This is because even a low viral load can be enough to induce an immune response, which is effectively what a typical vaccine does.
Snip:
While this hypothesis needs to be backed up with more clinical study, experiments in hamsters have hinted at a connection between dose and disease. Earlier this year, a team of researchers in China found that hamsters housed behind a barrier made of surgical masks were less likely to get infected by the coronavirus. And those who did contract the virus became less sick than other animals without masks to protect them.
Poiuyt
(18,114 posts)Politicub
(12,165 posts)Biden is calling for a mask mandate, and Redfield is saying masks are our best option for controlling spread, even going as far to add they may be more effective than a vaccine.
RobinA
(9,886 posts)masks protect the wearer? Another 180. And they wonder why no one trusts science. If this is what passes for science, it's no wonder.
LisaL
(44,972 posts)The one he had is a surgical mask. Good quality surgical masks also protect the wearer, although not as well as N95s. Cloth masks maybe offer some protection to the wearer, but they are not really able to filter very small particles.
IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)since protecting others isn't a concern for certain types of people.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)also protects the wearer, even against a maskless infected person if the duration of contact is 15 minutes or less and the mask wearer performs proper hygiene procedures post exposure.
IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)Trump supporters pack in real close in rallies without masks.
He does make good points about the 18-25 year olds who like to go out to bars and parties. But the people who work in stores don't have much protection from maskless maskholes carrying fake HIPAA cards and think masks are for sheep, social distance is for testing military surveillance systems, they're taking away our freedoms, etc.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)that extends around two three feet above their heads. And the employees are masked. Publix has been successful enough that it has removed directional shopping lanes, but has kept social distance at checkout. I have not seen a maskless person in the Publix that I shop at for two months, everyone is masked.
spanone
(135,791 posts)Duppers
(28,117 posts)Warpy
(111,138 posts)Maybe he's under orders to prepare us for the fact that the vaccine will be a "your money or your life" proposition so they can contine to cull the herd of all us useless people who dress out o WalMart and fuck up the scenery.
Duppers
(28,117 posts)K&R
kacekwl
(7,013 posts)time smart people ignore the dope in the oval office. Dumb people are welcome to ignore him too.
Chakaconcarne
(2,433 posts)calimary
(81,107 posts)Wonder how long before he, too, is replaced. Suffering from the insufficient suck-up disease.
malaise
(268,693 posts)Donald Trump again contradicted Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Robert Redfield once again, saying that Redfield made a mistake when he said that masks are the most important, powerful public health tool we have.
I might even go so far as to say that this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine, Redfield told a Senate panel Wednesday.
Trump said that a vaccine will be more effective as masks have to be handled very gently, very carefully. Trump said that he has seen people at restaurants not being careful with their masks.
Masks have problems too. ... A lot of people did not like the concept of mask initially, Dr. Fauci didnt like it initially, Trump said. He did not mention that Fauci has since clarified that he advised against masks early in the pandemic out of fear that the guidance would create a panic-induced shortage on personal protective equipment for essential workers.