It's not symmetrical. You're missing that.

but ok we can disagree to agree

I don't think what you are saying disagrees with what I have said at all.

When I first came to BC in Feb and March my friends and family thought i was nuts as we sprung to an early covid lead, but by the end of March, May I felt I had made the right decision as rates plummeted in BC while rising in Quebec, Ontario and AB.

People need to understand the value of a mask as way too many have the wrong expectation of what they do.

If you are spending a small amount of time going in and out of places like Coffee shops or Grocery stores, masks on everyone work just fine.

Just like with social distancing they reduce the chance of direct droplets (sneeze, cough, etc) providing splatter to your face and they also reduce the acceleration and trajectory of the aerosol, allowing them to fall towards the ground in less distance.

They allow for normal air circulation to disperse the aerosol and droplets quicker (much like being outside does).

There are not a panacea. Sitting inside for hours with a mask beside someone else with a mask will still see the aerosol build up and penetrate your mask.

But we should have no doubt that the addition of extra 'time' needed BEFORE you get infected (aerosol or droplets) is a positive that reduces overall risk.

It very much disagrees with what I read, but apparently not with what you actually meant. When you said "the worst hit place in Canada during that first wave", it seems you meant in the first few weeks rather than the entire first wave. Makes much more sense, now that I understand that. Seems weird now to think friends and family even considered that noteworthy in such early days with very small numbers, but we've come so far it's easy to forget where our heads were at then. I remember thinking schools might be closed for a couple weeks after spring break until we stopped the spread, and then life would be back to normal.

Agree with pretty much everything you said here at the end, but I'm quoting just this part because it kind of sums up what my point has been. Masks are helpful, as long as we don't forgo or decrease other more needed measures because of them.

And I really hope that they can come up with some good data about outdoor mask wearing so the idea of outdoor mask wearing where there are no crowds can be killed off, unless it actually proves effective in some way.

I was involved in hiring a medical expert to clarify some Covid-19 practices. His ending statement was something ala there being a lot measures where there isn't a full consensus, the point wasn't 100% certainty, but a totality of measures that we can reasonably expect to work and that personal opinion, even for an expert, was pretty irrelevant.

Indeed. There we're various different options that could garner that reasonable consensus. As with many things, execution matters far more than the endless debates about which is best. Unfortunately ...

(to avoid the old debate rearing it's maskless head again, I doubt any reasonable consensus view didn't include masks)

Yeah, that's basically what I was thinking. But this study - while showing that mask mandates essentially decrease time spent at home, which increase risk - adds a different perspective:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82574-w
In other words, at least for some it's not that they believe the masks provide immunity but rather that the mask mandate is taken as a sign of less overall community risk. I think we're seeing plenty of that now as people who haven't been vaccinated are going out more because the risk is much less do to the people who have.... a free-rider subset of which the use of dart guns against wouldn't cause me to lose any ethical sleep over, fwiw.

That adds a further point on top of the same point. I would say not as suggestive as ending lockdowns, saying it's safe to go on holiday abroad and paying people to go to lunch!

I'm not sure it's so much a free rider problem as more of the same 'masks work!' problem. People are very poor at understanding reduced risk rather than safe. As a somewhat obscure joke - The who forgot to mention how hard that is.

Ya it's hard to remember the change over the earliest few weeks.


As the virus got its first foothold in Canada it was BC that lead the way and the thought was the high Asian population was going to be a big problem here.

As BC had all the big firsts ('community spread', 'death', 'lockdowns') and back then 20 new cases a day was making people gasp. 70 was considered very bad and when we broke 100 a day I recall everyone gasping at that number. Of course deaths were off the charts per case compared to now.

How things have changed. BC has been mostly open since that first wave and has lead the country amongst bigger Provinces and in Vancouver, outside some small protest groups i see 100% in mask usage and people complying with the other orders.

This idea seems to have been killed off already. Mask usage among people walking around outdoors has plummeted in the last three weeks.

To a degree, perhaps, but I would be really surprised if there is a study that shows that the net effect of seat belts was an increase in serious injuries or fatalities from traffic accidents. And I would be even more surprised if there is a study that shows that the availability of condoms increased the number of sexually transmitted diseases or unwanted pregnancies.

I think we can and should use some common sense here knowing data may/will follow from the experts.

We know now that spread is manly a function of two things which is droplets and aerosol and either of those ability to reach our mucus membrane (nose, eyes, mouth). Both are impacted by proximity or what we call 'distancing'.

Why? Distancing allows for them to disperse or be diluted before reaching you.

Why? Air circulation. The way air moves.

Thus outdoor >>> indoor. Indoor with great air circulation > than indoor with poor circulation, etc.

Thus why even in BLM protests very little community spread happened.

So when I am out walking, I try not to walk directly behind the same person for a long period of time, especially if i cannot distance, as I do not want to be in a constant down draft. Same for sitting too close beside the same person outside.

But if you have any distance or ability to not be around the same person for any prolonged time or there are any winds you can avoid being downwind there simply is no reason to wear a mask outdoors.

If i am at Concert in the Park and in a seat close, I might reconsider but really the circumstances would be few, especially as vaccination rates rise.

Which ties into the point I was repeating with CHez that I don't (and Monty does not) think it would have any meaningful net impact.

Open to data saying otherwise, but until then we are all just spit balling opinions.

I would think if the studies did show that we wouldn't be advised or required to wear seat belts. That or the communities they were studying went extinct before the studies could be completed.

With the masks my view is everything else being equal a community wearing them would have a lower r, with the bulk of that reduction do to the infected infecting fewer people. Hard to imagine how that wouldn't be the case. But probably not by much and certainly not by enough to get C19's r <1. In contrast, we know staying at home significantly reduces r. So we have hugely disparate outcomes between the two preventative measures whereby even a small increase in risk compensation (not staying home) could have a much larger impact on r.

So the ptb need to know the effects of risk compensation but not really to tell people not to wear masks since we/they assume the masks have some effect on reducing r. Instead they need to know the extent and consequences of risk compensation to craft a messaging strategy to keep people at home.

The analogy is with the behavioral response. Not the consequence of that response which isnt comparable as one is an exponential infectious disease and the others erm... isn't.

We simply dont know the extent of the consequences but we understand the nature of the behavior easily enough as well as being able to see it. We also know that it's an exponentional infectious disease which is easy to understand as well.

Incredible scenes in the other place.

Mind is blown no hyperbole.

The biggest problem in the spread of Covid is that people who are asymptomatic can still spread it. So wearing of masks can significantly lower r. But unless testing and contact tracing are ubiquitous (not the case in the US) people won't be staying home when they are carriers...

Look at South Korea. Everybody there wears masks.

Couple that with the ability to test and contact trace and they have repeatedly stopped Covid in its tracks.

Not to mention that mask wearing significantly reduces the viral load at the point of transmission which should reduce the death rate.

WHO recommends masks even for fully vaccinated; Pfizer, Moderna vaccines may offer long immunity: COVID-19 updates

Sadly the W.H.O has trust issues and good luck with a mask mandate

Are mask mandate in our province is lifted tomorrow and will go mask free unless a business mandates it. To those that wear a mask while driving alone or walking outside alone bless their hearts and those that choose to wear one no worries. I am double dosed and living life. Now open the border so I can go to Vegas

I wear a mask when it is required, such as when riding on a city bus (which I do almost every day).

If I am outside I don't wear a mask, unless I am within several feet of someone who is wearing a mask, in which case I put my mask on so as to not create possible discomfort for that other person.

I was surprised with the mask mandate lifted I was in Costco yesterday and 80% of folks were wearing a mask still. I expected more mask less folks I keep one with me at all times and if a business has a policy to still wear it I will.

What is going on in England concerns me though with the Delta variant

where are you where people outside are wearing masks?

i don't even have a mask anymore.

Canada for me. Yeah it blows me away when I see people in a car ort outside by themselves wearing a mask. Though my overall attitude is doesnt effect me so all the power if it makes you safe

That is because you assume a person wearing a mask by themselves in their car is doing it for safety reasons when it might just be that for a short drive between places that require it that it is a pain to take it off and put it at times, especially if the person has glasses. Just may be easier for them to keep it on for the 2 minute drive from store 1 to 2. If you are walking to a few stores, do you remove your mask when walking outside for 20 seconds between stores even if no one else is on your path between them? If you do then bless your heart.

All the best.

good point. such a pain to take off mask/put it on, especially with glasses that will fog up with mask on.

Well, fortunately you have both vaccines so that is not an issue, hence you got rid of your mask...

I understand that you missed the actual point of my post, so I will use smaller words to help you. A lot of time people look at others and assume things based on their own narrow perspectives as to their behavior, so they lack the context of what they are seeing and make judgments that are not always accurate. A lot of people will not take off/put on their masks if its a minimal time interval because its a waste of time and they are not personally offended wearing the mask in that interval. I say that knowing you will not understand what I mean, nor care.

All the best.