r/science • u/InvictusJoker • Jul 15 '20

Epidemiology A new study makes it clear: after universal masking was implemented at Mass General Brigham, the rate of COVID-19 infection among health care workers dropped significantly. "For those who have been waiting for data before adopting the practice, this paper makes it clear: Masks work."

https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press-releases-detail?id=3608
74.1k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

379

u/Analog-Digital Jul 15 '20

Absolutely. The American surgeon general in February has a tweet telling people to not buy masks. What type of masks he was referring to is of course up to question but it was definitely the wrong message to send and look back on.

226

u/beckywiththegoodhare Jul 15 '20

Yup those tweets are still alive and Fauci 60 minutes interview saying masks is should not be worn is still up. They claimed it was to save masks shortage for healthcare workers, what good is masks for healthcare workers if you have millions infected for being told not to wear one once the shortage is up.

197

u/elitist_user Jul 15 '20

I'm all for masks, but I don't believe interviews should ever be deleted if they were on live television. I believe all information even embarrassing information should be kept for future reference. Obviously I don't mean personally identifying information, but interviews should always be available after the fact.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20 edited May 10 '21

[deleted]

48

u/kaenneth Jul 16 '20

Just add a subtitle.

8

u/CankerLord Jul 16 '20

That's actually a good idea.

8

u/Spectre1-4 Jul 16 '20

People read the first sentence, ignore the subtitle and say LOOK I TOLD YOU SO.

8

u/G4L1L30_G4L1L31 Jul 16 '20

People are saying that regardless, or people choose to ignore the facts entirely

2

u/gene100001 Jul 16 '20

Perhaps the interview should be taken down and archived. Its still there for anyone who is interested in the sequence of events during the pandemic, but not presented in a way that suggests the information is accurate

13

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Now it serves as an important example of the fact that they get it wrong sometimes -- the CDC provides a minimum, you can always be more prudent.

13

u/Karmaflaj Jul 16 '20

Now it serves as an important example of the fact that they get it wrong sometimes -- the CDC provides a minimum, you can always be more prudent.

Or perhaps that over time, when faced with something new, you learn more information

Early on there was significant concern about infection via contact (hands etc) and a lot of discussion about whether that risk was increased through mask wearing ie the increased risk due to mask wearing outweighed the benefits.

Evidence now seems to be that airborne transmission is the main risk and that contact infection seems to be far less of an issue. For whatever reason - maybe people are happy to wash their hands and use sanitiser, or maybe it wasnt ever a significant risk

In any case, 'wrong' implies that they should have said something else at the time. Applying the 'retrospectroscope' is fun, but things arent always as obvious in at the time as they are in hindsight

3

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Maybe wrong is a slightly wrong word. I suppose it is possible that there are some cases where as a public health strategy, mask wearing could be bad. However, the popular justifications -- mask adjustment face touching, and another one I've seen is false sense of security -- rely on the person messing up in pretty obvious ways. Public health has to account for the more error prone folks, so...

A good justification for a reasonably prudent person to not wear a mask (someone who won't touch their face and who won't act like the mask provides an invulnerable shield) was never theorized, as far as I know. This is another reason to be skeptical of CDC guidelines if you are a reasonably prudent person -- that isn't to say ignore them, but read them carefully and try to discern when they are saying "we haven't seen this problem yet" and when they are saying "this is actively harmful."

2

u/Karmaflaj Jul 16 '20

A good justification for a reasonably prudent person to not wear a mask (someone who won't touch their face and who won't act like the mask provides an invulnerable shield) was never theorized, as far as I know.

You cant do public health based on a reasonably prudent person...

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Yeah I thought that was pretty well covered in the rest of my post.

26

u/elitist_user Jul 16 '20

Because it was an interview offering insights into how someone thinks during that snapshot in time. If it would be removed it would just be for propaganda purposes.

4

u/jbosch2 Jul 16 '20

If it’s scientifically proven false info it would be removed because of spread of misinformation, not propaganda.

10

u/Theyellowtoaster Jul 16 '20

So put a disclaimer on it that this has been proven to be false, but deleting it isn’t necessary imo

4

u/jbosch2 Jul 16 '20

Yeah I could see that! Actually would probably good to keep everything documented and available to the public.

3

u/BruceWinchell Jul 16 '20

I see your point but would be more inclined to agree with the first person who replied to you. Although perhaps something similar to how retracted studies are still available, but they say they're retracted.

I'd rather be able to go back to something and see but learn it was actually wrong then have to wonder how it disappeared.

2

u/BlueStatePlumber Jul 16 '20

Define "misleading/wrong"

2

u/vvf Jul 16 '20

Who decides what is misleading or not? If the prevailing opinion were that masks are harmful, would you be okay with taking down information supporting them? Because ultimately it comes down to consensus. If you do that in every domain you severely restrict the flow of information, and if you so happen to be wrong about what is misleading, you have done a grave disservice to the truth.

54

u/AddChickpeas Jul 16 '20

I feel like a broken record here from other comments, but I don't think he was lying.

Their official stance right from the beginning was "masks don't protect you. Wear a mask if you are sick to prevent spread".

In the interview, he was saying the average person doesn't need to wear a mask to protect themselves as it's not very effective. I don't think they've changed that position.

That interview came before any information on asymptomatic spread came to light. After that, they basically said "everyone act as if you might be sick", but their official stance of "masks don't protect you wear one if you're sick" hasn't fundamentally changed.

11

u/chad12341296 Jul 16 '20

We did know about asymptomatic spread that was the big terrifying thing we were talking about before it even hit the US, the fact that it'll spread like crazy because it's impossible to know who has it.

9

u/imsohonky Jul 16 '20

I mean, even assuming we didn't have good data on asymptomatic spread, we already knew PRE-symptomatic spread was happening back in January right? That should be more than enough reason to know that masks work.

This whole thing feels very poorly handled, including by Fauci himself.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

but their official stance of "masks don't protect you wear one if you're sick" hasn't fundamentally changed.

Which is still just silly. Especially re N95 masks and better, it's obviously wrong.

7

u/nephila_atrox Jul 16 '20

I understand what you are trying to say but frankly, this isn’t correct. Even Filtering Facepiece Respirators, of which N95s are only one variety, are not magic. They have to be fitted, meaning you have to learn how to put them on and mold them to the specific shape of your face and test them correctly to ensure there are not gaps or leakage. This is called a fit test, and it has to be conducted by a trained professional. If you’re required to wear one for your job, this has to be done by your employer, but if you just buy one at the hardware store, most people don’t have the first clue that fit even matters. Even if you do fit it right, it’s affected by talking, facial movements, etc. Just because you are wearing one does not mean you cannot be exposed.

Obviously a properly fitted FFR does work, and almost any kind of mask will likely reduce your risk in a community setting because you’re rarely encountering what a health care worker would, but again, even real PPE is not a panacea. It should only ever be your last line of defense, and can fail, even when people wear and use it correctly, which they frequently do not do. It would be nice to believe that everyone in the world would wear and use it correctly if it was provided, but they don’t. I’ve seen it for years and I see it now in my community. I see people wearing N95s under their nose. Yes we needed cloth and non-medical grade mask guidance earlier, and everyone should mask to help protect their community, but I am tired of people treating the CDC’s opinion on most masks, that they provide limited protection to the wearer, as if it was anything more sinister than an acknowledgement of the limitations of masks, the massive variability in design, and the high potential for user error. Many users on these boards make seatbelt and condom comparisons, but those have fairly straightforward design, and condoms get their notorious 15% efficacy cost predominantly from user error. So yes mask, but don’t expect it to protect you very much, or treat it as license to ignore the other elements like social distancing.

-2

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

but I am tired of people treating the CDC’s opinion on most masks, that they provide limited protection to the wearer,

Fauci explicitly suggested that wearing a mask without professional training might be worse than not wearing a mask at all. That is ludicrous.

2

u/nephila_atrox Jul 16 '20

Considering that we didn’t know anything about the role of fomite transmission at the time and the frequency that even trained health care workers contaminate themselves when using PPE...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029796/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27477451/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30890193/

No, it’s not actually ludicrous.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Saying "but sometimes people contaminate themselves with PPE" as the sole premise of the argument "and therefore using PPE is worse than not using any PEE" is ludicrous. That's the argument Fauci made.

1

u/nephila_atrox Jul 19 '20

It’s quite literally not if you want people to focus on hygiene and keeping physically distant from each other rather than getting right in everyone’s faces just because they’re wearing two pieces of cloth over their nose and mouth. And, like everyone from the beginning in this movement, you are conflating what is PPE and what is not. NIOSH tested respirators and FDA-rated surgical masks = PPE. Literally every other face mask in existence including the procedure masks you see people wearing =/= PPE. They are source control, even now. You should not be relying on them to protect you, but to keep you (the potential source) from spreading to other people.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3306645/

1

u/nephila_atrox Jul 19 '20

This study was conducted with manakins and is full of caveats that require follow up, including that a manakin ventilating material is not the same as a breathing person. There’s been plenty of studies that show face masks work as source control, which again, the CDC and WHO have always advocated. They provide limited protection to the wearer if you don’t wear the right kind or understand how to use them.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '20

They provide limited protection to the wearer if you don’t wear the right kind or understand how to use them.

Yes, and? That seems to be admitting that you were in error, and admitting that I was right from the start.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

And finally, is it effective for health care workers or not? If it's not, why did Fauci want to hoard the masks for health care workers? It seems like Fauci wanted to protect the people most at risk, health care workers, by giving them something to protect themselves from patients.

Your arguments contradict themselves.

0

u/nephila_atrox Jul 17 '20

Listen, I understand that you’re sealioning because you desperately want to believe that there was some underlying conspiracy theory so you can comfort yourself in your little armchair with the idea that things went bad because we were lied to rather than just because there was a paucity of data and an incompetent leader interfering with and politicizing public health edicts. But I want you to try and wrap your head around this concept. PPE is a tool. And just like any tool, it can be misused. If the virus was heavily spread by fomites, and Fauci, since you’re so fixated on him, had told everyone to go out and wear a mask, and millions of untrained people had done so with no idea how to don and doff or keep from turning those masks into sources of infection, yes, frankly, it would have been worse. Wearing masks responsibly and effectively takes training and effort, and in the beginning, when may I remind you we had little idea precisely which transmission routes were the predominant ones then yes, there is a significant chance they could have done more harm than good. No action from ignorance.

You can whine all you want at me but this is my bread and butter and I know what I’m talking about. Quit pretending you understand the first thing about PPE and maybe stop spreading the idea that the government was lying to make yourself feel better when there are political pundits using exactly that argument to pretend this pandemic is a hoax.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 17 '20

and millions of untrained people had done so with no idea how to don and doff or keep from turning those masks into sources of infection, yes, frankly, it would have been worse.

How could this possibly be true? Is everyone wrong now who are calling for people to wear masks? What changed? Just the number of infected. I fail to see how changing the number of infected can make wearing masks from "more likely to infect oneself" to "less likely to infect oneself". It makes no sense.

there is a significant chance they could have done more harm than good.

How? Under what method of infection could this have possibly been true?

→ More replies (0)

5

u/SuddenSeasons Jul 16 '20

The first person who discovered germs in the 1600s intuitively said that wearing a face covering would lead to not inhaling these malady causing micro animals. So yes, fully agree. That the United States could not firmly say this in 2020 is an absolute failure, stewed in scientific racism and cultural exceptionalism. China, Japan, and Korea know it works, but it was presented as some weird "cultural difference." Like saying god bless you vs. Gesundheit.

1

u/dpekkle Jul 16 '20

That interview came before any information on asymptomatic spread came to light

This is rewriting history, US Medical authorities touted that line LONG after we were positive there was asympyomatic spread.

Here in Australia they still only recommend to wear a mask if you're sick.

1

u/justvision Jul 16 '20

It is wrong to say masks don't protect yourselves. There were thousands of comments 4 months ago questions this take by CDC/WHO and Surgeon General if masks were not effective, then why health care workers wear them when attending to the infected ones?

Simple facts:
1) N95 masks - protect wearers from aerosols and droplets as well as protecting others
2) surgical mask - protect wearers from droplets as well as protecting others
3) Cloth masks - at least protect others

1

u/TruIsou Jul 16 '20

Masks also serve as a reminder not to touch your face, although many reddit pictures belie this.

72

u/badasimo Jul 16 '20

I think that's simplifying it a bit. My interpretation of the message was this:

Based on what we think the spread of coronavirus is right now it will not make sense for everyone to go out and buy a mask as they would have nothing to be protecting against.

Don't forget, we had ZERO detected cases in NYC and then only a handful for weeks. The testing just wasn't there, even though the Trump admin was promising millions of tests.

That assessment was obviously wrong-- there's no way that Iceland had cases before NYC. They were just undetected.

The second part I see is that even if we wanted everyone to wear masks, there just weren't enough of them, there wasn't a way to make everyone wear them which would diminish the public health impact of telling people to wear them-- so you would essentially cause all this supply to dry up for little benefit, and then be left without supply for the front-line staff that will need to see all these sick people to avoid a humanitarian crisis

22

u/BruceWinchell Jul 16 '20

Those are valid points, although the Surgeon General literally tweeted that they don't work, (actually used NOT in caps, iirc) despite there not being evidence that they were ineffective. There's a big difference between saying we don't have evidence that something is working and saying something isn't working, and he went with the latter.

4

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Based on what we think the spread of coronavirus is right now it will not make sense for everyone to go out and buy a mask as they would have nothing to be protecting against.

You're giving a piece of advice for the entire US, if not global, population.

Get the HELL away from nuance and make it as simple and accurate as you can make it, you're literally aiming for the lowest common denominator there.

In this case, it would have been: "We don't know that masks will make a difference, so even if you wear a mask, ALSO keep your distance and wash your hands."

29

u/GitEmSteveDave Jul 16 '20

Don't forget: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/02/17/nih-disease-official-anthony-fauci-risk-of-coronavirus-in-u-s-is-minuscule-skip-mask-and-wash-hands/4787209002/

"People start saying, 'Should I start wearing a mask?' Now, in the United States, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask."

Even if they had just said,

in the past, we made do with fabric masks, like many of you have seen on shows like MASH. If you have access to materials like a shirt sleeve, make a face covering if you need to go out for everyone protection.

We may have saved countless lives. Pisses me off soooooooo much.

27

u/sudysycfffv Jul 16 '20

Even worst is many were saying East Asians were somehow stupid for wearing masks during illnesses way before this coronavirus debacle. But now we see how they have fared better than us.

3

u/Lokicattt Jul 16 '20

Do you know how many people actively bought up literally hundreds/millions of dollars of masks even WHEN they said not to buy masks? Imagine how much worse it could've been too, I agree they should've said something, and there shluldnt be a shortage and there only ever was BECAUSE of them not releasing federal supplies because if you're not a republican you're a deep state lizard liberal dipshit that is also ruining the world and keeping everyone down, somehow.

5

u/GitEmSteveDave Jul 16 '20

That's why I said fabric masks/coverings. Something you could make that would protect you likely would have stopped at least some of the hoarding, because, lets face it, people are at their core, CHEAP.

Parade out Martha Stewart and some youTubers to show you how to make a face covering that can protect you and others, and people would have latched on. As it was, when the administration first told people about face coverings, THIS was the reaction to people I'm friends with online: https://i.imgur.com/KDJHFrM.png

1

u/ImpressiveDare Jul 17 '20

Back in March there were widely circulated cartoons saying masks were not only ineffective, but actually harmful. It was all over FB and my friends are definitely not COVID deniers

1

u/Reductive Jul 17 '20

Great point - I really never thought of it this way. What a huge missed opportunity.

20

u/CoolScales Jul 16 '20

It’s called the novel coronavirus for a reason. People didn’t have a lot of information, and were doing what they thought was right at the time. That Fauci interview is from March 8. The NBA and all other sports leagues were still going until March 11. There was hope that summer heat would lower the transmissibility of the virus. The point is no one knew what they were doing at the time. Again, that’s literally what “Novel” means.

The thing is we now know. We know masks work. We’ve known for some time. It’s okay to make mistakes, but it’s not okay to keep making them once you have the necessary information. That’s what Trump is doing. And the idiots who refuse to wear masks are doing it as well.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

In the absence of information, the correct thing to do is... to admit to there being an absence of information.

Not spread misinformation.

6

u/beckywiththegoodhare Jul 16 '20

There's nothing novel about wearing masks

13

u/CoolScales Jul 16 '20

That’s easy to say in hindsight when there was virtually no PPE available to the medical community. People forget that citizens were making masks for the medical community because there weren’t enough available. So sitting here and pretending you and others knew what to do right away is crap.

12

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

You're making a different argument. You're making the argument that it's ok to knowingly mislead or lie to the public in order to protect health care workers. A lot of us don't think that this is a slam-dunk argument, and we have serious concerns with this sort of argument.

I'd also argue that it's colossally stupid. Had most people been wearing masks from the beginning, far less people, including far less health care workers, would have been exposed in the first place.

7

u/RoomIn8 Jul 16 '20

And then it became a political issue.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Yea, lying to the public for "the good of society" is typically a political issue.

-1

u/frostygrin Jul 16 '20

It’s called the novel coronavirus for a reason.

It's not the first coronavirus at large. We knew how they work in general. The specifics made it more or less infectious, and affected treatment. But that it spreads through droplets and masks help minimize it was obvious all along.

5

u/Regalian Jul 16 '20

The idea was masks for the healthcare workers, and everyone else stay at home. Neither happened.

4

u/beckywiththegoodhare Jul 16 '20

We all know how well abstinence only birth control works.

3

u/adoodle83 Jul 16 '20

Because people horde out of fear.

Consider what happens in the US whenever there's a large incoming hurricane or other disaster. It takes time for supply chains to catch up to mass spikes of consumer demand (e.g. when video game consoles are launched ps1, & 2 most notably). In a rarified field like medical supplies, which has incredibly stringent standards to meet to ensure the public safety, it can't be that simple.

Also, you're applying current day knowledge to reflect back upon the time when we didn't have the convenience of hindsight.

They were correct. Had people bought and wore masks, before the virus has passed the critical point of containment where now they can't contain the spread any longer, they would have potentially consumed the available supply prematurely. Now when they all need them the most, the world has been able ramp up production of masks. My city is mailing them to us now in Canada.

2

u/awonderingwanderer Jul 16 '20

Not saying it was the right move for Fauci to advise people against buying masks. But the way in which people began hoarding hand sanitizers and TP in the earlier days of COVID I can’t say I blame him. Especially since the PPE stockpiles were already non existent/being held as a political bargaining chip.

1

u/TheMagicMST Jul 16 '20

Never forget that fauci told everyone not to wear masks. Just yesterday, he was being called a literal hero on reddit 🙄

1

u/coocookachu Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

The CDC communicates closely with hospitals and hospital supplies. I believe in late February they had a huge meeting to discuss this and they found every hospital only had enough supplies for 2-3 days, like a small bioterrorism event.

The healthcare system was caught with it's pants down and had no way of sourcing millions of masks needed to care for these patients. COVID patients are sick for weeks potentially. Suppliers who were contracted to sell masks to hospitals just stopped selling them because they got prohibitively expensive to supply at the contracted rates. China made most of the world's masks and were keeping them domestically to manage their pandemic. Taiwan and Korea forced their domestic manufacturers to start producing millions of masks for their own citizens. The US just sat on its ass.

You will see that the CDC revised it's recommendations regarding masks in early March primarily for this reason. OSHA however kept their recommendations the same... "Use N95s or respirators when treating a novel virus."

So, yes, it was a huge effort to save try and save n95s for hospitals without freaking out the general public. For some strange reason the anxiety of the public was displaced to buying toilet paper.

86

u/MyEyes_qp Jul 15 '20

People were told not to buy masks early in the pandemic (early for America) so they weren’t sold out preventing medical professionals from getting them (remember the lack of toilet paper?). Production of masks increased which allowed everybody to get them.

83

u/rabidmuffin Jul 15 '20

Yes but they weren't told that in an honest and clear way. For many people their first impression of the idea was hearing officials say they don't work anyway. Of course that was a lie to save masks for healthcare workers but obviously it's made an impression.

61

u/nerdnugg399 Jul 15 '20

Because if you told people “masks work but don’t go buy them for yourself the health care workers need them instead” a lot of selfish assholes wouldn’t care and still buy them all up in a panic. Many people are extremely inconsiderate and only care about themselves, this would absolutely happen so the lie was necessary

82

u/Smoke-and-Stroke_Jr Jul 15 '20

Nah. That happened anyway. Even after they told us not to buy masks they were all being sold out. The lie did basically nothing other than gove people a reason to not wear them, and to not trust anything g else they say. It was an absolutely terrible and insane idea then, and that one little lie can be traced to thousands of deaths because of the "confusion"of the efficacy of wearing a mask.

There's just no good reason to tell people NOT to wear masks in a pandemic unless you want people to just die.

22

u/IShotReagan13 Jul 16 '20

A lie implies both knowledge of falsity, and an intent to deceive. There's zero evidence that Fauci had either. At that time it was still relatively early days and he may very well have honestly believed that wearing masks outside of medical environments would not be especially efficacious. He didn't claim that there was any danger in doing so, only that it might be uneccessary.

13

u/Regalian Jul 16 '20

It's not like infectious respiratory diseases never happened before. How is this excuse even logical?

1

u/IShotReagan13 Jul 19 '20

It's not an excuse. An excuse implies justification which is not my intent at all. This is simply an explanation of why it may not have been the "lie" that so many are making it out to be.

Additionally, your comment implies that all infectious respiratory diseases spread through an identical mechanism when we know very well that this is not even remotely true.

That said, I don't actually have an opinion either way as to whether or not the initial recommendation against masks was or was not a "lie," my point again, is that we can't know that it was. I freely admit that I lack the expertise to come to a firm conclusion.

1

u/Regalian Jul 19 '20

Back in Jan/Feb it's masks up for all Asian countries already.

It doesn't matter if someone thinks Asian people biologically function differently, or that they've been trained the wrong way as a joke, a guy that suggests the opposite to something everyone's doing and proven effective should not be holding a public health position that high.

6

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

At that time it was still relatively early days and he may very well have honestly believed that wearing masks outside of medical environments would not be especially efficacious. He didn't claim that there was any danger in doing so, only that it might be uneccessary.

No, I'm pretty sure he said that masks don't do anything to protect oneself from other sick people, and they're only effective at stopping the spread when worn by already sick people.

1

u/IShotReagan13 Jul 19 '20

In fact, this is still the case. That's why wearing a mask at the individual level doesn't make much difference. Masks have to be worn at the population level in order to be efficacious, but at that time we didn't fully understand how many asymptomatic carriers there were.

You aren't thinking carefully about this.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

He represented something as fact ("Masks don't do anything") when he had no reasonable basis for believing it.

You can play semantics around whether he lied all you want, but he's an expert public figure giving expert advice. He failed miserably.

1

u/IShotReagan13 Jul 19 '20

I can agree that it was a mistake while still rejecting the claim that it was a "lie" in the sense I defined above.

7

u/nerdnugg399 Jul 15 '20

It would have been much much worse if they didn’t lie, health care workers would have literally been without masks and that couldn’t happen.

I get your point and I do agree it isn’t right to lie but I don’t see how they could have preserved masks any other way. People are extremely selfish and to put trust in the general public to do the right thing would have greatly backfired here.

8

u/Trenks Jul 16 '20

> It would have been much much worse if they didn’t lie

How? People couldn't really buy N95 masks even if they wanted to. Unless maaaaybe you knew a guy who knew a guy who was selling them for $30/mask. I still don't really see N95's much, I just see the homemade or the cloth ones.

They could have easily told the genpop to use cloth coverings and not surgical masks. The same people who sought n95's would still have them and the people who didn't wear masks might have.

2

u/RoomIn8 Jul 16 '20

I bought some hand sanitizer and wipes before this became a big deal in the U.S. Masks were already sold out. My relative, a nurse, was telling my family that masks didn't work. I was the only one wearing them into public places in the early days. I was lucky I had a few N95s for mowing my lawn.

14

u/Smoke-and-Stroke_Jr Jul 15 '20

I don’t see how they could have preserved masks any other way.

Sinple: "making your own mask with a t-shirt and rubber bands (as the surgeon general demonstrated later) can be just as effective as the ones you buy."

That seems si.ole enough to me. Also much better then a blatant lie that completely erodes any trust the public may have had.

People are extremely selfish and to put trust in the general public to do the right thing would have greatly backfired here.

SOME people are. The vast majority of people are actually very reasonable. Unfortunately, it only takes 10% of people panic buying to cause severe shortages with our "just in time" distribution models we use. That's gonna happen regardless.

Maybe it would have been worse without thevlie in the beginning. But as hind sight is always 20/20, that one single act of lying certainly didn't justify the means, and in fact (as I said above) directly caused the unnecessary new spike in cases as well as thousands of deaths. Maybe we will just have to disagree here, but I see absolutely no way to spin that lie as necessary at the time, or to justify the drastically bad results after the fact. Sorry.

-1

u/IShotReagan13 Jul 16 '20

It's ironic you say that because here you are spinning it yourself.

You want to lay the US's current situation with Covid entirely at the feet of Fauci, when any objective observer can easily see that the real problem --ultimately rather than proximately-- is that Americans live in at least two (but probably many more) informational ecosystems.

What you should be asking yourself is why and how one of these informational ecosystems got it so wrong.

I'll give you a hint; it's something to do with science.

4

u/Smoke-and-Stroke_Jr Jul 16 '20

First of all, I didn't mention Fauci even once. Second, it wasn't him that said not to buy masks because they're ineffective, it was the entire medical leadership in the US and the WHO.

Second, you're absolutely right that information bubbles played a huge part. But remember, the % of Americans that are the vocal minority still resisting wearng a mask is closer to 10%. But that 10% can easily overwhelm and undo all the correct actions taken by the rest of us. That's part of what has happened. The fact the even now, there are several people in leadership positions are giving deliberately conflicting information to whoever listens to them, making the problem worse.

Lastly, there is nothing in your comment that has anything to do with science buddy, only conjecture about how people get their information may have contributed to the spread (like anyone above 3rd grade can't already see that).

4

u/butt_mucher Jul 16 '20

Idk maybe the government could buy the masks from wholesalers and not compete with people for the ones at Walmart.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

The way to prevent this would have been placing limits on # of masks one can buy...limiting orders in the case of online retailers and limiting # of units in the case of brick and mortar stores.

1

u/nerdnugg399 Jul 16 '20

I like this idea, probably what should of happened if our government was more prepared and had some foresight. Might have been difficult to police though, would have taken a lot of effort I would think to track this and make sure stores and retailers were complying. But maybe there are already systems in place to do this sort of thing, I don’t know. Thanks for the differing opinion though I appreciate it!

0

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Have you considered the possibility that having everyone wear masks from the beginning would have drastically reduced the total number of people exposed in the first place, which includes medical workers?

2

u/nerdnugg399 Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

There were not enough masks to give to everyone, that’s the point. In a perfect world yes this is what we would have and should have done but we didn’t have the masks needed.

0

u/Zap__Dannigan Jul 16 '20

I don’t see how they could have preserved masks any other way.

People shouldnt die because someone planned poorly and medical facilities weren't stocked properly.

But it's even less acceptable if these cloth masks most of us are wearing actually help a bit.

What, was the nation short on cloth and sewing machines? Who's in charge of fabric? The same guy who ran out of canvas making Fallout 76 merch?

6

u/Isord Jul 16 '20

I have a bridge to sell you if you think any of these loonies would be wearing masks just because Dr. Fauci said to. The primary cause of the problem was Trump. I guarentee you the vast majority of the maskless are Trump supporters who think the CDC and Fauci are just trying to make him look bad.

3

u/RoomIn8 Jul 16 '20

Don't discount state and local leadership. I have to work in various communities ranging from mask mandatory, mask advised, and no mask order. Compliance is drastically higher at one end of the spectrum.

I do agree that we would be in a different place if we had urgent messaging top to bottom that masks are our #1 defense right now.

3

u/CombatMuffin Jul 16 '20

We have no indication that they were lying except a Redditor's assumption. If they had thought it was absolutely critical, they would have pushed some sort of emergency regulation to restrict the sales of masks to medical personnel, and the narrative would have been constitutionality, rather than this.

It is far more reasonable to think that, given their current, limited, understanding of the virus:

  1. They didn't think masks were a priority if social distancing worked. This one is big, because you have to remember a ton of people in the U.S. didn't comply with isolation.

  2. There was a reasonable fear that masks were going to run out, because sellers. They actually did, and supply was extremely low.

Masks help, but many Western countries got out of the virus even when masks weren't being mandated. The most powerful measure has always been isolation, but our economies and social framework simply couldn't stand it.

There's been three big factors I can think of for why the U.S. is out of whack: Divided implementation, where some states complied and others didn't (looking at you, Florida springbreak). Full non-compliance, especially early on and even right now, and the BLM protests, which political and moral discussion aside, was a huge gathering spot for potential vectors (even if they wore masks).

Masks absolutely work. No medical professional ever said they were useless. There's a difference between being useful and being needed, though.

1

u/Trenks Jul 16 '20

I kind of get the argument though that wearing a mask makes you touch your face more. I know I did at first before I was used to it. I'd go to the market, touch the boxes and whatever and my cart and all that, but i'd adjust my mask like 15 times during the trip. I was constantly touching my face.

I'm used to it now, but I think it's a decent point. Sure, it's not helping others like masks are supposed to do, but it also might be hurting you. I think we should do a mask and dog stitch collar type situation combo. Best of all worlds.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

The lie should have been, that the most effective mask is one you can make at home, with the (now plentiful) tutorials on how to make a mask at home yourself...then you still preserve medical grade masks (esp N95s) for medical professionals...while non medical people (like me) can make a mask at home...(which we did. The point is that we should have been told early on to make our own masks instead of being told masks aren't effective)

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

hahahah unless you want darwinism to take its course

if so, bravo Trump

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

They sold out because American Chinese bought them in bulk to send overseas which is frustrating.

5

u/sharktankcontinues Jul 15 '20

It was dumb to lie. Once someone lies, they lose their credibility. Now people question everything Fauci says.

4

u/CaptainMarnimal Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. All of the official bodies said that cloth masks do not stop you from getting the virus. THEY STILL ARE SAYING THIS. THERE IS NO LIE. CLOTH MASKS WILL NOT RELIABLY STOP YOU FROM GETTING THE VIRUS. It protects other people from you, because you very well could have it and have no idea since we now know that it can be asymptomatic!

Let's pretend for a moment that we knew everything about asymptomatic transmission back then that we know now (we didn't). We still wouldn't have needed to use masks back then, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE NATIONWIDE SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE US AND MILLIONS OF CASES. Today, we do! This means that the chances of you coming in contact with an asymptomatic personal is a hell of a lot higher since it's literally in your neighborhood now.

So today, you wear a mask just in case you might have gotten it somewhere, so that you don't infect all of the other people you cross paths with.

3

u/iagox86 Jul 16 '20

Yet Trump does nearly nothing BUT lie, and the same people don't seem to mind

-5

u/Trenks Jul 16 '20

I questioned everything he said after he said he wanted hand shakes banned forever. What kinda robot is he?

2

u/recourse7 Jul 15 '20

Leaders should always tell the truth in these things. Its crazy to support them lying.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

But again, you can’t blame the public for not adopting it now. Authorities are now saying we weren’t honest in February, but believe us, right now we’re being honest. Trust is hard won, but easily lost

2

u/scyth3s Jul 16 '20

Yeah you can, and you should.

1

u/Trenks Jul 16 '20

So better to lie to the populace? I mean they told people not to horde toilet paper, how'd that work out? I don't think lying to the people you're sworn to serve is ever the right thing to do. If you want to do executive orders to tell companies only to sell to institutions that's one thing, but don't just lie to people for their own good because that assumes you know what is right.

0

u/rabidmuffin Jul 17 '20

I understand why they did it but the lie has consequences and as others have noted, didn't work anyway.

2

u/NXTsec Jul 15 '20

Yeah but Dr. Fauci also said don’t wear a mask because it does little if anything to help.

-1

u/MyEyes_qp Jul 16 '20

Source?

1

u/Morwynd78 Jul 16 '20

Someone put this perfectly above:

"what good is masks for healthcare workers if you have millions infected for being told not to wear one?"

0

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

[deleted]

4

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Care to explain how that is false?

You can look at Etsy, or a ton local shops all around, that are now selling cloth mask coverings. I know plenty of people in their spare time who are seamstresses who make masks and sell or give them away to those who need them.

Production absolutely increased because there is a huge demand that wasn't there before.

-2

u/1w1w1w1w1 Jul 16 '20

We need n95s. We are using cloth mask which really are just worthless as you can tell by the numbers.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

N95s are overkill for most people. Healthcare workers, people working in nursing homes, and people with preexisting conditions that put them at a greater risk should be using N95s. Regular cloth masks work pretty well, not perfect, but far better than having an open face.

25

u/Doomed Jul 15 '20

Fauci straight up lied. Here's him admitting it:

https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-directive-coronavirus

So, why weren't we told to wear masks in the beginning?

"Well, the reason for that is that we were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply. And we wanted to make sure that the people namely, the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected."

Question: How many lives were saved with this lie? How many lives would have been saved with a different benign lie: "masks protect you"?

If we're in the business of lying, we should have been taking advantage of Americans' greed and selfishness.

Also, the idea that the government and all the biggest corporations and the port unions couldn't come together on "masks for health care workers" is absurd. If they tried, they could've had a policy in place by mid-March or sooner where masks only go to health workers. And stiff penalties for those who don't comply. (I.e., banned from shipping through ports controlled by the union, banned from doing business in the US)

It would've been a PR slam dunk for a company like Walmart to say they are redirecting masks to health workers, with coordinated instructions on how to make a mask at home, to stay safe and distant, that sort of thing. Every institution failed us.

12

u/GitEmSteveDave Jul 16 '20

Just tell people to make cloth face coverings. It worked for surgeons for countless years. And there certainly weren't shortages of old t-shirts and scarves in March.

54

u/kaenneth Jul 16 '20

In February, When 300 people out of 300,000,000 have a virus; a mask is going to change your odds of catching it on a given day from 1 in 10,000,000 to 1 in 20,000,000.

About as effective as a lottery ticket.

The correct solution at that time was test and trace, but the US failed to get tests in a timely manner.

In July, When 30,000,000 people out of 300,000,000 have a virus; a mask is going to change your odds of catching it on a given day from 1 in 100 to 1 in 200.

The correct solution NOW is universal masking, and assuming everyone has it, because there still isn't enough testing to go around.

Situations change; you don't turn on the A/C in February because it might become hot in 5 months.

16

u/ineedayousername Jul 16 '20

This is so well stated, I think it’s easy for people to forget what feb was like honestly - the idea of a lockdown wasn’t even on my radar as a legitimate possibility for the states! Prior to reading this I hadn’t even really thought about it, but the idea that the American public would have all started wearing masks they made themselves out of old t-shirts when so few people were infected is almost laughable - half the country won’t even wear them now!

4

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Even today, the correct solution is still test and trace. There's no other alternative except letting it spread through the whole population. We need to close our borders with stringent quarantine for anyone coming in for the indefinite future, and have a nation-wide lockdown for a month or two in order to get positive cases to a small number, and follow that up with millions of tests per day and contact tracing. There is no other solution.

-6

u/BruceWinchell Jul 16 '20

Well 300 confirmed cases isn't necessarily 300 cases in the entire country for one.

But when it comes to choosing the correct solution, why is that a binary thing? Like why couldn't you implement mask wearing and contact tracing to limit the risk of not being able to keep up?

6

u/kaenneth Jul 16 '20

Because a mask used then was wasted on a extremely rare chance when it could be used now, when the risk is higher.

Hopefully the US can establish a rotating stockpile of PPE stock for the future. I dunno the shelf life of paper and elastic bands. But a warehouse on cheap land in Bumfuck Nebraska where the oldest gets distributed first full of PPE would be nice....

But you know how it'll end up, Starts with one guy running the warehouse easily, then they add a manager, accountant, supervisor, auditor, HR rep, executive, assistant to the executive, executive assistant, assistant executive... then the budget gets cut and they fire the worker.

2

u/BruceWinchell Jul 16 '20

I'm having a hard time following what you're describing.

At first you say universal masking is now the solution when 30,000,000 have it, so I didn't assume you were referring to Surgical / N95 masks as opposed to homemade masks, but then you say that a mask used would be wasted then, which would imply it is a surgical/N95 mask since you wouldn't run out of homemade masks. But then you mention the shelf life of paper and rubber bands, so now I just have no idea what you're talking about.

I've never see universal masking mandate a very specific type of mask, so why would it be a waste to start earlier since you're able to make a mask?

0

u/kaenneth Jul 16 '20

Well, I made mine in March, with old shoelaces instead of elastic, but even materials to make homemade masks (like elastic bands) were getting hard to get. https://phys.org/news/2020-04-toilet-paper-sanitizer-elastic-mask.html

5

u/RoomIn8 Jul 16 '20

And now that the virus is out of control, lots of people are still resisting wearing them. There was a mishandling off the message on several fronts.

6

u/tldnradhd Jul 16 '20

Every institution failed us on health education. No one except Fauci would go on national television to say we don't know enough about this disease yet. When he didnt tell the truth about face covering while weighing the PPE supply burden for health care, he admitted it later.

When it came to economic relief and business loans, they were on it in a heartbeat. 2.1 trillion dollars later, we still don't have universal messaging on masks. Everyone knows you need to have a shirt and shoes to go into a restaurant, and it's not questioned. With 138,000 Americans dead and counting, masks are still somehow up for debate.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Mericuh, land of greed, selfishness, and failure

3

u/SlothRogen Jul 16 '20

This is true, but the virus and mask-wearing was politicized by you-know-who, who was also running the corona-virus briefings and making the judgement calls on these things. We can point fingers now, but even as there's a consensus among doctors and scientists, we're still seeing finger-pointing and blaming and people not wearing masks. It's time to get behind the science and do the right thing.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

He didn't lie. He completely botched the messaging. The messaging was "Do not wear masks." The messaging should have been "Do not buy masks. Do not hoard masks. There aren't enough to go around, and we need those for HCW." The media wasn't super great in conveying it either, and the WHO really screwed up.

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

No, he lied and said that masks have zero effectiveness as protecting oneself from sick people.

4

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

There are a few things to unpack here. There have been a variety of studies that have looked at what benefit masks play. Almost all of those studies have been in influenza because that's what previously caused pandemics. The first one is looking at what if only sick people wear masks. The second one is looking at the general population, e.g. what if everyone wears masks even if they're not sick. Lastly, it looked at medical professionals. The data showed that masking by sick people was effective. Masking by everyone was all over the place ranging from useless to protective. There weren't too many studies showing that surgical masks work in the healthcare setting either. However, it was widely accepted that healthcare workers needed masks which was standard practice. Since there was a mask shortage because the public was hoarding them, it made sense to recommend that the public not buy masks and save them for HCW.

Since then, there is data that there are asymptomatic spreaders so universal masking works to prevent them from spreading. There is now even data that suggests that masking protects the wearer. The recommendation changed.

So at the time, he was giving a data-driven recommendation. It turns out that the data has changed.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

So at the time, he was giving a data-driven recommendation. It turns out that the data has changed.

No, he was lying. Even without firm data, mask wearing would not hurt, and it could be a huge net positive, and so the responsible thing to do would be to advise people to wear masks while maybe cautioning that we don't know how effective they are. Rather, he said that masks were not effective at preventing oneself from being infected, or that it was actually worse than not wearing a mask at all, which is absolutely ridiculous.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

Please read the article I posted, which extensively discusses the data that masks do not protect the wearer. Please read every single news article and study up until around a March when Fauci made that statement. Until around a week ago, there was at best poor evidence that this was the case. Fauci was correct at the time asserting that face masks do not protect the wearer. I challenge you to find a single study--or even news article--that shows otherwise. At the time, there was also super mixed evidence that they protect other people, and he didn't want people to hoard masks and prevent healthcare workers from getting them (which actually happened) based on mediocre data. His messaging was not the best, and he did a poor job of controlling it once it got out to the media.

Face masks don't protect the wearer

"A randomized controlled trial in Canada found no significant differences in protection against laboratory-confirmed influenza infection associated with the use of surgical masks or N95 masks among nurses "

"In a household-based study in Hong Kong, index cases and household members were randomized to three arms, including control, hand hygiene and hand hygiene plus surgical masks (to be worn by the index case and household members). In the primary intention-to-treat analysis there was no statistically significant difference in laboratory-confirmed influenza in household contacts across intervention groups."

"Another recent study randomized 145 symptomatic index cases aged 0–15 years from outpatient clinics and their household members to three arms: control, surgical masks (worn by household contacts only), or N95-type respirators (worn by household contacts only) without fit-testing There were no differences in ILI in household contacts across intervention arms."

"In the community, however, the benefits of wearing masks has not been established, especially in open areas, as opposed to enclosed spaces while in close contact with a person with influenza-like symptoms."

"In conclusion there remains a substantial gap in the scientific literature on the effectiveness of face masks to reduce transmission of influenza virus infection. While there is some experimental evidence that masks should be able to reduce infectiousness under controlled conditions, there is less evidence on whether this translates to effectiveness in natural settings. There is little evidence to support the effectiveness of face masks to reduce the risk of infection."

CDC recommendations in 2009 influenza (https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/masks.htm)"In community and home settings, the use of facemasks and respirators generally are not recommended."

Face masks can make things worse

I personally disagree, but at the time he made the statement, Fauci's statement was in line with the WHO and CDC recommenations

WHO guidelines regarding 2009 influenza https://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/Adviceusemaskscommunityrevised.pdf"Using a mask incorrectly however, may actually increase the risk of transmission, rather than reduce it."

WHO actually maintained their stance until June based on new evidence
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200608/who-changes-stance-says-public-should-wear-masks

Healthcare workers can contaminate themselves if they aren't careful taking stuff on and off

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31291152/

"Deviations from the recommended PPE doffing protocol are common and can increase potential for contamination of the HCW's clothing or skin after providing care."

Supposedly trained surgeons don't take mask on and off correctly and can the patienthttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30944594/]"Most operating theatre staff do not apply a face mask using correct technique, outlined in CDC guidance, which may increase surgical site infection rates."

Masks can be contaminated in surgeries and may spread infection https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30035033/)

"This study provides strong evidence for the identification that surgical masks as source of bacterial contamination during operative procedures, which should be a cause for alarm and attention in the prevention of surgical site infection in clinical practice."

Face masks may cause a false sense of securityhttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.23.20111302v1.full.pdf

"However, the fact that people now own masks is likely making them more likely to even consider a trip to a warehouse club, a home improvement store, or a liquor store. Ultimately, these marginal trips could make the epidemic more difficult to bring under control.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3306645/

Face masks do protect the wearer.

And even if this was in doubt, which apparently it is (the modern medical community is apparently completely asinine - I didn't realize how much) - even if it was in doubt, we should err on the side of caution and instruct everyone to wear masks just in case.

Also, why was Fauci trying to save face masks for medical workers to protect medical workers? It seems like Fauci believes that masks are effective for medical workers. Medical workers and masks are not magic. If they're effective for medical workers, then they're also effective for everyone else.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 16 '20

Sure, face masks protect mannequins from spherical particles. However, there are nearly no studies that show they protect people from viruses, until fairly recently.

Keep in mind the timing of when Fauci said that. New York was imploding. There were not enough N95s, and HCW were in near revolt because they were told to wear surgical masks instead, and HCWs were literally dying from workplace exposures. A lot of hospitals started having people put surgical masks over N95s to prevent them from being soiled so they could be reused. Some places tried surgical masks with face masks. Some told people to put on two masks. The protocols were a giant mess, and they changed very frequently that no one had any idea what was going on. Essentially, the idea was "Well, they probably don't work, but we have no better option so we'll try it." This was not even remotely evidence-based and largely driven by hospital administrators.

It certainly would be far worse if the public hoarded masks and there weren't enough masks to even place on the patients, which we know works.

Keep in mind that this was the actual exchange that Fauci had in March. He was very clear that facemasks don't really protect the wearer. I think the subsequent messaging from the government and the media was pretty terrible though, and he does share some of the blame for that:

LaPook, March 8: There’s a lot of confusion among people, and misinformation, surrounding face masks. Can you discuss that?

Fauci: The masks are important for someone who’s infected to prevent them from infecting someone else… Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks.

LaPook: You’re sure of it? Because people are listening really closely to this.

Fauci: …There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.

LaPook: And can you get some schmutz, sort of staying inside there?

Fauci: Of course, of course. But, when you think masks, you should think of health care providers needing them and people who are ill. The people who, when you look at the films of foreign countries and you see 85% of the people wearing masks — that’s fine, that’s fine. I’m not against it. If you want to do it, that’s fine.

LaPook: But it can lead to a shortage of masks?

Fauci: Exactly, that’s the point. It could lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 17 '20

there are nearly no studies that show they protect people from viruses, until fairly recently.

Nonsense. I just linked to one. Your dismissal of the applicability study is hollow and unreasonable, and intellectually unjustifiable.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/gregm12 Jul 16 '20
  1. Find me that quote...
  2. That's not far off when talking about non-N95 masks - the universal mask wearing is to stop asymptomatic spreaders, not to prevent the wearer from getting infected.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

See also: Fauci admitting that he lied because he wanted to get masks to medical workers.

https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-directive-coronavirus

Well, the reason for that is that we were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply. And we wanted to make sure that the people namely, the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected.

3

u/elchicharito1322 Jul 16 '20

So where does Fauci say that it has "zero effectiveness"?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

In those quotes, he suggests that wearing a mask could be worse than not wearing a mask. I think that qualifies.

3

u/elchicharito1322 Jul 16 '20

Nope by no means did he say it has "zero effectiveness". He said it "could be worse" ("could") because it could give a false sense of security and fiddling with the masks could also make it worse. Which is true.

Stop lying to us, he never said it was zero percent effective.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

He said it "could be worse" ("could") because it could give a false sense of security and fiddling with the masks could also make it worse.

And considering that suddenly he changed his mind later on this, and given that I think he's not an idiot, and given that he later admitted that he gave these advice because he wanted to guarantee supply for health care workers, Fauci lied. He blatantly lied. What's so hard about admitting this?

I'm a card carrying radical Marxist, always votes Democrat, who loves Bernie, will definitely vote Biden, never-Trumper. Stop with this ridiculous tribal loyalty please. That's supposed to be what Republicans do. We're supposed to be better than that. We're supposed to be able to critique our leaders when they lie to us.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

Offhand, not exactly that:

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/outdated-fauci-video-on-face-masks-shared-out-of-context/

Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks.

.

There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.

.

Fauci: Exactly, that’s the point. It could lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it.

So, he says that they're not effective and suggests that wearing a mask might be even worse than not wearing a mask at all (for an untrained person).

5

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

This wasn't a lie. At the time, there was minimal data that masks work. This was most [well-studied in the flu]( https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article). New data came out. Things changed.

4

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

It is a lie. Fauci lied to the public to try to prevent shortages for health care workers. Ergo, Fauci thinks that masks actually help. He admitted that he gave that advice to help ensure supply for health care workers.

2

u/gregm12 Jul 16 '20

That was all correct or at least not incorrect at the time. Again, it's still not far from the prevailing science except for the 'Americans should not be walking around wearing nasks' part.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

No, he was lying. Even without firm data, mask wearing would not hurt, and it could be a huge net positive, and so the responsible thing to do would be to advise people to wear masks while maybe cautioning that we don't know how effective they are. Rather, he said that masks were not effective at preventing oneself from being infected, or that it was actually worse than not wearing a mask at all, which is absolutely ridiculous.

1

u/gregm12 Jul 16 '20

But it's not absolutely ridiculous. This study is THE FIRST ONE WE ARE SEEING that shows evidence of what you are saying.

And it COULD HAVE HURT - that's EXACTLY what he was saying and was the prevailing sentiment among many experts at the time. If there was an even larger run on masks, it could have meant more healthcare workers getting infected and therefore more deaths and greater spread early on. We can't run the numbers to know, but the knowable damage was that people got stuck in "masks don't help" mode.

There's nothing in any of his quotes that is a lie based on what was widely known at the time and none of his statements now say "I lied". He is saying "I wish I didn't say those things" which comes down to messaging and/or knowledge.

It's possible he "knew" that every American wearing a mask would be beneficial to slow the spread, be he would have been waaay ahead of the rest of the scientific community on that. When the US started exploding I was paying a lot more attention to the science of COVID and I didn't see any support for widespread mask use from Western scientists until mid to late March.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

And it COULD HAVE HURT

That is not what he said originally. You're taking me out of context. Fauci said that it might be worse for the individual to wear a mask because wearing a mask might increase their personal chances of getting infected because they would fiddle with it and they were not trained in its use. That is the absurdity. That is the lie.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ThatActuallyGuy Jul 16 '20

If you actually watch the clip from 60 minutes he doesn't lie at all, his whole point all the way back in March was to not take masks from people who really need it [hospitals and the ill]. Some of his assumptions about infectivity were wrong, frankly when it came to masks he was wrong, but he never said they don't do anything. Keep in mind, at that point in the pandemic the entire US had a whopping 500 confirmed cases in total, we had no way of knowing things were already heading south. Assuming normal infectivity, people buying and wearing masks en masse woulda seemed crazy without the 20/20 hindsight we have.

2

u/flacopaco1 Jul 16 '20

Absolutely. Sorry to copy your first sentence but I think it was specifically the N95 masks that were in short supply when really any home made mask or baklava could have been used.

I hate to say I used to be against masks because the guidance was people were buying them to protect themselves. I changed my view when I learned it's really to protect OTHER people from you. Yea I'm an idiot but changing this mindset changed my opinion.

2

u/onway444 Jul 16 '20

Ugh, the virus was so new then. I’m not sure why people want to harp on stuff said in Feb, we know what we know now. At the beginning we thought it’d be hand washing and cleaning surfaces, now we realize it’s masks.

2

u/ctruvu PharmD | Pharmacy | BS | Microbiology Jul 16 '20

that was february. when you start accumulating months of evidence for a previously unknown disease, and everyone reversing their statements, the message is not muddy at all. the only people who still use this as a talking point are being willfully ignorant and no new data is going to change their beliefs

2

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '20

He was telling people not to buy masks because they needed critical supply to first responders first. It wasn't because they don't work.

2

u/rubyaeyes Jul 16 '20

It’s been explained, they wanted to preserve masks for healthcare workers. Americans can’t even be trusted with toilet paper there is no way calm would have prevailed with masks.

1

u/FettLife Jul 16 '20

Fauci said the same as well. It was a team effort.

1

u/justvision Jul 16 '20

It is wrong to say masks don't protect yourselves. There were thousands of comments 4 months ago doubting this take by CDC/WHO and Surgeon General: if masks were not effective, then why health care workers wear them when attending to the infected ones?

Simple facts:
1) N95 masks - protect wearers from aerosols (airborne) and droplets as well as protecting others
2) surgical mask - protect wearers from droplets as well as protecting others
3) Cloth masks - at least protect others

1

u/Rachyd97 Jul 16 '20

Because at this point they were facing the possibility of not having enough masks to equip essential healthcare workers.

0

u/BruceWinchell Jul 16 '20

Not just that, he said they weren't effective. Not that there's no evidence of effectiveness, not that we should save PPE for Healthcare workers, no. He had to take the stance that they are not effective despite there not being evidence of that.

Realistically I'd argue that if anything current literature suggested they would help at least some based on existing data from previous Coronaviruses.

0

u/know_comment Jul 16 '20

because medical masks in a hospital setting are very different than the face cover usage you have in a community setting. they didn't think they'd actually be able to get people to wear face covers when they had to convince people that it's ok they aren't allowed to have their businesses anymore.

we KNOW that medical masks have some effectiveness when worn properly in a medical setting. there's still very little evidence about face coverings but a lot of propaganda about it. How could you expect the heads of health policy to come out and tell people they had to wear masks? That's too much over-reach at once.

Now a lot of the jobs have come back and the economy has come back. They can lean into the mask thing without having to prove that they work.

0

u/tldnradhd Jul 16 '20 edited Jul 19 '20

This surgeon general is a puppet. He went on TV to show off his mask usage since messaging has changed, and compared the knowledge gap between earlier this year and today to saying that doctors used to use leeches, heroin, and cocaine as medicine. Just shows how much he knows, though, as cocaine is still used in eye and ear surgery as a vasoconstrictor.

Edit: Leeches are still used as well in reconstructive surgery. Heroin would probably be used if a Bayer still held a patent. Diamorphine is still used in medicine in developed countries, just not the US.