In my community and our local hospitals, the unified message is if your sick enough to think you need to wear a mask, a better practice is to stay at home. If your healthy, also stay at home. And if you’re healthy and need to be out a better practice is hand hygiene, phones, keys
-
-
Replying to @domillima
We're not testing people; there is clear asymptomatic/mild/undetected case transmission. How are people supposed to know when they should mask up? What is "sick enough" given this isn't like SARS—no consistent febrile presentation? Truth is, there aren't enough masks.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
That’s exactly my point. There aren’t enough masks. In the same way people can perform the flawed mental math that decides “Hey, I’m at some increased risk and I should wear this mask,” they can instead decide to stay home.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @domillima
Telling people "there isn't enough masks" is what I propose rather than telling them masks don't work, or that they only need them if they are sick (since they cannot know when). Hong Kong, Taiwan etc. aren't all staying home. They masked up and life goes on, epidemic contained.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
“There aren’t enough masks” sounds akin to “there aren’t enough lifeboats.” I don’t know how this is any less hysteria inducing. Strictly speaking I believe that masks alone do not work. The virus lives 10-12 hours on contact surfaces.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @domillima
It's not all or nothing. If that were the case, health care workers wouldn't be wearing them. There are papers out of Wuhan, comparing mask wearing and non-wearing healthcare workers, by the way. No infections among mask wearers, many among non-wearers. (I'll find paper again).
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @domillima
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.18.20021881v1.full.pdf … Look at what Taiwan did again. They distributed masks, blocked hoarding, ramped up domestic production. Much saner, and health care people have the masks they need, plus lower rate of infection among the public, too.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
That’s exactly the paper. Methodologically flawed. N95 use in a particular ward generalized to people out in public. Yes if we had unlimited supply everyone could do what they please. These public health recommendations are couched in the context the resources we have.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @domillima
Yes! What I'm saying is messages should be couched in the *reality* of those resources we have. "Look, we don't have enough masks so we are going to prioritize health care workers and distribute what we have left while producing more." That may work. "Masks don't work"->hoarding.
5 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Not enough masked probably would’ve also led to panic and haording.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I think you'd be surprised at people's capacity for altruistic behavior when approched with the stark truth and call for sacrifice. It's the feeling that the message is "massaged" to fit the top-down needs that lead to mistrust/hoarding. (Also good book: https://www.amazon.com/Paradise-Built-Hell-Extraordinary-Communities/dp/0143118072 …)
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
We’ve got two incongruent arguments here, on the one hand people are altruistic in the face of adversity and on the hand they are cold and quick to stigmatize their neighbor. We’ll never truly know.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @domillima
It's not incongruent at all. People can act terrible OR wonderful depending on the setting, messaging, context. That's humanity for you. So my argument is setting the conditions for altruism (truth plus response) rather than terrible (masks only when sick:stigma/hoarding).
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.