Why I believe it is simultaneously true that masks work and mask mandates do not work. The reasons form the basis for our ability to move forward together. A long🧵
First, masks. I don’t pay attention to simulations and mannequin studies. Those of us who write COVID policies for healthcare settings started with this systematic review and meta-analysis which used data from COVID and other 🦠s.
N95s were in disgustingly short supply that first spring. Many hospitals reserved them for COVID patients undergoing high risk procedures only. We wore surgical 😷 for the rest. And we found something amazing: HCWs weren’t higher risk than other essential workers.
Despite prolonged close contact (we practically bathe in 🦠 all day), seroprevalence rates among HCWs were consistent with the surrounding community, and patient facing HCW were not at greater risk than non patient facing. @ericashenoy summarized it in these slides in 2020.
Little known fact: the patients, for the most part, are not wearing masks. One-way masking is how we have always used them. On the sick person or the HCW, not both. Oh, and if you’re worried the holes are too big? That’s ok. The electrostatic charge is part of the mechanism.
So if masks work, why don’t mask mandates?
Because:
a. Most spread happens in places you wouldn’t wear a mask (at home, at social gatherings with friends etc, not at the grocery)
b. People are wearing cloth masks (which don’t work) forbes.com/sites/stevensa…
c. People aren’t wearing them right
d. It’s not realistic to expect that people keep a mask on all the time, because they need to eat and drink (traveled by air before the mandate lifted? people are eating and drinking every second in airport and plane)
That’s not to say that we need to tighten the mandate & require continuous wearing of N95s. Countries/cities/schools with mandates haven’t had different shaped curves than those without, even if they required N95s. Plus if you mandate medical grade PPE, you’d better provide it.
What does this mean? It means mandates are not effective or necessary, even when cases are rising. They cause rifts in society for no reason. If you’re high-risk or risk averse, a medical grade mask will protect you as well as it would if others were wearing it too.
Getting COVID is inevitable, so I’m not willing to hide my face forever. Let’s get back to a place of mutual respect. Of evidence-based science rather than ideology. *That* is how we take care of each other.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This op-ed resonated with me. I believe we are heading into the most divisive phase of the pandemic. Unlike the early days, the division is not across party lines. 🧵 nytimes.com/2022/02/04/opi…
Rather, it is now between those who are more vs less risk averse, those who are more vs less able to frame risk in context,…
…those who believe strongly that we must maintain a red-alert all-hands-on-deck approach to public health vs those who believe a shift to personal responsibility is more sustainable.
First- can we agree that mask mandates (in public and in schools) should not continue forever, even if we can’t agree on whether the time to drop them is next month, next year or next decade?
Once community immunity is such that the vast majority of people will not be harmed by the virus, it is unsustainable to ask them to keep wearing masks for a small fraction for whom it will forever remain dangerous.
We’ve reached a point in the pandemic where it’s become unsustainable to depend on others for protection. Luckily, if you want to avoid COVID at all costs, you don’t have to rely on anyone else’s mask compliance. 🧵 theatlantic.com/politics/archi…
If you wear an N95/KN95/Kf94/P100/snorkel mask, you do not need to worry about what anyone else is wearing. Mask mandates can be dropped in towns and in schools, and you should not care.
In fact, the phrase “N95 mandate” is like an oxymoron. We do not need to insist that kids in school wear higher quality masks. They can if they want to, or if their parents want them to, but it does not need to matter to anyone else.
Why I like 5 days of isolation, with no test, as recommended by CDC and now MA DPH. 🧵
1. Remember when #MedTwitter rallied together against outdoor masks? Because when the “rules” are overly broad one loses sight of where the greatest risk lies. Energy is not unlimited. A 5-day rule concentrates energy on minimizing risk when risk is greatest.
2. A 5-day rule incentivizes people to test because the harms from finding out you are infected are less. 3. A 5-day rule could prevent society from grinding to a screeching halt over the next week or two when everyone gets infected at once…
At my hospital, every COVID+ inpatient is evaluated by an Infectious Disease specialist. We are seeing more fully vaccinated patients admitted now than a few months ago. But it turns out many are in the hospital for reasons *other than* COVID. Why does that matter? 🧵
I and others have been saying that in a post-vax era, with cases de-coupled from hospitalizations, we need to shift our focus from cases to hospitalizations as a measure of risk and for the purpose of policy-making. commonwealthmagazine.org/health/a-roadm…
But if the hospitalization metric captures people admitted both *with* COVID and *for* COVID, decision-making will be based on flawed data. In August, Massachusetts DPH added a question about presence of symptoms to the daily reporting requirement. This isn’t working.