Quote:
Originally Posted by Monticore
This virus is more complicated than previously known respiratory viruses and as seen in this thread masks are a very complicated issue as well. When you Really want to emphasize social distancing tell some people that masks make it safe to go out might be counter productive .
|
Why did you bother quoting my post since none of what you wrote offers any sort of counterpoint to what I said originally?
It's quite simple: if there's a benefit to wider public health by wearing an improvised, non-medical grade PPE mask through limiting droplet spread
now then there certainly was one four to five months ago
because it is known that typical influenza and cold viruses are commonly transmitted through droplet spread. Even if it were not the case that SARSCov2 is inhibited by such improvised measures then there still is the wider benefit of cutting down the spread of non-novel respiratory viruses which in turn cuts down on health care usage.
That's the case in which they were wrong and a cloth mask doesn't do shit against SARSCov2. If they were right, then C-19 proliferates at a much slower rate and potentially negates or curtails the length of major lockdowns across the country.
In either circumstance, the CDC gets an out once further information on SARSCov2 comes to light and can say "Look, we weren't
sure improvised masks would work for
instances when people could not avoid 'social distancing', but at the time it was the best we could recommend since we needed to preserve PPE for health care providers."
But instead, their best course of action was to lie and say "nah just proceed as normal" in order to prevent runs on
medical grade PPE by the general public when there was a potential alternative in recommending physical distancing
in concert with improvised masking to those who couldn't otherwise avoid to stay in household isolation.