Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It's just hygiene theater to make people feel better. 95% of time when I see masks in a situation that isn't particularly risky (outdoors), it's not an N95. People do it because it makes them feel safer and to virtue signal.

What's bizarre is that it's rare for public health officials to care, either. It makes me think they're actually very effective (which I doubt with delta), they want to people to feel safe to keep the economy running, or they're worried about how much more contagious it could get facing a real obstacle.

As for the hard lockdown, I think we're past the point of that being a theoretical option. Looking to Australia, it's still spreading. There's a level of contagiousness where the minimum amount of interaction is still to much to stop the spread. We'll see what happens in New Zealand.

You're right about the national scale for everywhere other than Singapore. There are just too many people too spread out to actually enforce it. Borders are too porous, and enough people are onboard with letting it spread that this option isn't practically or politically viable.



> It's just hygiene theater to make people feel better.

With the disclaimer that I'm not an expert: this is wrong. Cloth masks are moderately effective in preventing the wearer from infecting others. N95/N99 masks do this job much better, as well as significantly protecting the wearer, unlike cloth masks. We've known this for some time.

As far as I know there's no reason to believe the new variants have changed things, other than making it even more beneficial to switch to N95/N99.

A slight aside: apparently Austria now requires use of FFP2 masks (roughly equivalent to the N95 classification): https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n432


Germany too: FFP2 or surgical masks, with the majority of people using FFP2, at least around here.


You think doctors wear surgical masks as hygiene theater too?

There have been countless looks at mask efficiency over the past year. "Normal" masks cut infenction risk in half. Yeah it's not 100%, but it's 50%!

Acting like everything is an "all or nothing" solution is going to be the death of us.


You argument is in bad faith: because something is effective but not perfect doesn’t mean we should get rid of it. If people are not wearing a mask properly, we should explain why it matters and how to do it — not throw out a good idea.

Same thing for lockdown: it works. It might not be enough, or there are too many edge cases in Australia, but dismissing distancing because the first attempt wasn’t enough, or perfect is the opposite of what Hacker News stands for.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: