A friend of ours called our attention to this unsettling story, which reports that Stillwater, Oklahoma, a college town, withdrew its re-opening rule requiring that customers entering stores and such wear face coverings because “Store employees have been threatened with physical violence and showered with verbal abuse.”
Let’s get it straight up front: If you threaten or abuse or are just rude to some store employee who is doing their job and enforcing a governmental requirement, even if you think that requirement is dumb, you are a bag of douche. At best. And, yes, you are un-American, because you are not supporting the war effort, so to speak.
During World War II, we had air raid drills in Iowa, and air raid wardens to enforce them, “because national solidarity,” as we might say today. Man In The High Castle notwithstanding, there was simply no other purpose for them. So if your grandparents were willing to hole up in the dark purely as a gesture of support to the national challenge, you can wear a goddamn bandanna when you walk in to a store or other indoor space.
Do, however, try to be cool when you do. Your Editor favors this look:
And if supporting the national effort isn’t your cuppa, then FFS be nice and respectful to the kid in the shop or the restaurant who is just trying to follow policy. That Stillwater’s mayor felt he had to repeal the rule because people were being mean to the employees actually saddens me, and not only because it is the sort of thing that would be more likely in Norman.
That out of the way, the “mask thing” has become weirdly tribal and partisan for a combination of truly silly reasons. The “experts,” including the CDC, told us not to wear a mask, only to reverse themselves six weeks later. This was no doubt confusing especially for Team “listen-to-the-science,” but President Trump put them all in the mask camp by declaring that he wasn’t planning on wearing one, even as he allowed he might change his mind. Instantly, the committed progressives here in Old West Austin and all over political Twitter started wearing masks even when alone in their own cars, and certain supporters of the president immediately declared their refusal ever to wear one. Among our most politically engaged, the mask became another political marker, a tribal totem. That is an actual damned shame.
Our guess is that the CDC and others initially told us not to wear masks because (i) there probably aren’t actually a lot of mask scientists roaming the halls down in Atlanta who really know what they are talking about so it took them a while to develop their position, and (ii) they told us a white lie because they were legitimately worried that panicked citizenry would suck all the masks out of the supply chain leaving our healthcare system exposed. (Like or not, deceiving the Great Unwashed has been a go-to for public health types for a long time, but that’s not the main point of this post.)
The nut of the issue is that there are really two different things with very different purposes that both pass as “masks” in the common man’s argot, even while they have profoundly different purposes.
The now famous N95 masks, often referred to by Covid-19 sophisticates as “respirators,” protect the wearer from infection when worn properly in combination with other personal protective equipment. The cheapo surgical masks, homespun stylin’ masks, and our bandannas required recommended for, say, customers in stores in Stillwater, protect other people from the wearer if the wearer is infectious and coughs, sneezes, talks, or even breathes too emphatically in close proximity to his victim interlocutor. This piece in The Atlantic walks you through the differences if you choose not to believe us.
Now, you may believe you are not infectious, and you may well be correct in that opinion. You may have been very careful over the last six weeks, completely symptom free, and quite certain that you have not exposed yourself. You may therefore assert that there is no need for you to wear a mask in public when in close proximity to others (such as in a store).
You would be wrong, and there are two reasons.
The obvious reason is that you might be infectious and not know it. One of the insidious things about Covid-19 is that you can spread that shit without feeling in the least bit unhealthy. But, as you say, you’ve been very careful. If you live in Oklahoma or Texas or many other states with exceedingly low confirmed case or mortality rates, you can be confident to a 98% chance or better that you are not carrying the disease.
But here’s the thing. How does the other person, the kid working in the store, know that? The fact is, he doesn’t. He has no idea whether you are religious in your social distancing or a conspiracy theorist who believes the whole thing is a fraud.
You wear the mask to reassure people who do not know you, to reduce the anxiety in their lives, as they do their jobs helping you. The “cloth covering” is, in addition to a symbol of solidarity and, unfortunately, partisan identity, a gesture of respect to hard working people trying to do their jobs.
That should be reason enough to put on your bandanna when you walk in to a store, or “speak” to a police officer. You really need no other.
36 Comments
So wearing a mask is appropriate virtue signaling? That’s the reason. If we were serious about this, we’d all wear helmet with a light bar indicating how many times we had washed our hands during the last 24 hours. Far more effective and therefore helpful.
Where does this stop exactly? My cashier has tats and piercing. I bet I could make him feel a LOT better if ….
Given that we are now in a race to herd immunity what favor are you doing for anyone again?
Can I not address your issue of “respect” by simply arming those in the public domain, with repeated contact with real and imagined disease vectors, with N95, N99 or N100 and be done with it? Those masks are NOT in shortage condition any longer.
Well, we might be headed there. I suppose I don’t see the inconvenience in carrying one in your pocket, and putting it on when you come in close proximity to somebody who has to confront many people every day just to do their job. Is it virtue signaling? I think it is for the anti-Trumpers who give you a sanctimonious glare when you are walking your dog without a mask. I also think that ideological anti-maskers are virtue signaling. As I see it, not all gestures of respect to people just doing their jobs and trying to get along is “virtue signaling.” It is respectful to alleviate their anxiety, whether or not there is a rule, and very disrespectful to berate them for just doing their jobs.
Another thing muddling up the mask controversy is that no one knows for sure how exactly the virus is spread. If breathing out is enough to throw virus particles into the air, that’s one thing. If the only way to get it is from someone coughing or sneezing virus particles into the air, that’s another. In any event, it appears that either social distancing OR wearing masks helps, but if you’re doing one, you don’t need to do the other. I’m heartened by tales from Hong Kong (a commenter on Instapundit one day) who said that Hong Kong is so densely populated that social distancing isn’t possible, but that everyone there wears masks and washes their hands frequently so that their infection rate is much lower than other places.
I’ll wear a mask just to make you feel better. However, my experience with masks is longer than yours as I worked in the OR for years and am a retired nurse. Wearing a bandana may not hurt you but it won’t help anybody else, according to decades of research, even very current.
It’s more of a “give them something to do so they feel like they are doing something.”
I defer to your experience and training. There is some evidence though that the severity of a Covid-19 infection may be influenced by the viral load taken in at exposure. If a cloth covering moves it from a lot to a little, that in itself is a benefit. Regardless, I agree we’ll be wearing proper masks once all the packages arrive from Amazon…
Btw, I live west of weird.
I’ll try to get some Central Texas pictures up. If you scroll back to 2016 posts you’ll see some.
As my daughter told someone, “My dad doesn’t believe a thing the government says about the virus, but he still wears a mask to Target.”
It’s less important now, but one of the lessons to be learned from this is the terrible “crisis communications” around the pandemic. I can’t think of a single elected official federal, state or local (at least in Texas) that has done even a halfway decent job. I thought Cuomo was OK until he defended pumping nursing homes full of infected patients.
The data and science around these diseases is so poor; that makes it critical for authorities to not compromise the trust people have placed in them.
“there probably aren’t actually a lot of mask scientists roaming the halls down in Atlanta who really know what they are talking about so it took them a while to develop their position”
Umm, no. Scientists thought about this years ago. In 2007 the CDC director said, and I quote, “During an influenza pandemic, we know that no single action will provide complete protection,” said Dr. Julie Gerberding, CDC director. “We also know that many people may choose to use masks for an extra margin of protection even if there is no proof of their effectiveness. If people are not able to avoid crowded places, large gatherings or are caring for people who are ill, using a facemask or a respirator correctly and consistently could help protect people and reduce the spread of pandemic influenza.”
Ref: https://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2007/r070503.htm
But that changed as 2009 preparation for the H1N1 pandemic. CDC: “In community and home settings, the use of facemasks and respirators generally are not recommended. ”
Ref: https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/masks.htm
So what changed in the Science between 2007 and 2009?
Well, the change in recommendation might, somehow, be just politics, but with the current administration that seems doubtful (given Trump’s obvious distaste for masks). I think the difference with Covid-19 is the apparently high level of transmission from asymptomatic people. In past pandemics, the response was to isolate symptomatic people quickly. That was enough to stop the infection in its tracks. This time, we can’t do that. Given that we are destroying trillions in wealth to stop this thing, getting even a small, marginal advantage by telling apparently (but not necessarily) healthy people to wear masks in close public encounters seems like a very small burden to impose. And, of course, there is the point that Asian countries have universally adopted masks and generally had fewer casualties than we have had. Are they all wrong?
I’m not at all anti-mask. I think they make sense for this situation. I was simply commenting on the idea that scientists had not considered mask wearing and gave out advice on the fly. Prior to ’09, the advice was “wear a mask if you are sick or if you are cautious.” Then it was changed to “we don’t recommend wearing a mask.” I’d note the ’07 position was entirely compatible with the Asian behavior (and I’m living in Asia right now). I wonder about that ’09 change, because it seems to have hurt the credibility of the CDC and infectious disease experts to make the “we don’t recommend masks” argument.
It might be informative for re-engaging the economy to have covid 19 infection rates (and antibody test results) from non-medical public facing workers such as cashiers in determining real-world community transmission rates. Not all stores, gas stations etc have opted for plexiglass or masks. Store receipts and log-ins tell the worker, the volume of customers they dealt with..that would presumably reflect viral load, which has been tied to incidence as well as severity. Have those folks been getting sick disproportionately? My local inquiries haven’t shown that. But the actual data is there.
I agree, and think that is an excellent idea. The data reported even by fairly transparent local governments (as in Austin) frustrate me. It would be great to know, for example, how many infected people share a household with other infected people, or live in a nursing home, or are prisoners. If it turns out that your odds of getting this out in the world, so to speak, are very low, that would have a huge impact on the politics of reopening the economy.
I had covid-19 and recovered. I suffered for these antibodies and, unless required to by law, I’m not gonna wear a mask to make other people feel better. Some of need to project normalcy.
I, seriously, hope you did not suffer too much. The huge variety of experiences in this disease is one of the really nettlesome thing about it. Anyway, if you are not going to wear a mask to make other people feel better, you are at least being honest about your choice, which is certainly a fair place many Americans are going to land.
The CDC had been consistent going back to at least 2009 on this issue. They bowed to “sophisticates” like you because, as Bart Simpson put it, “sorry Ma, the mob has spoken”. COVID-19 sophisticates do not call them “respirators”. People with half a brain call them respirators, as did I when I was fit testing thousands of health care workers for N95 RESPIRATORS in the 1990s for tuberculosis protection.
I wear them for public health theater for the same reason I acquiesce to equally worthless TSA security theater. Because I’m polite.
You’re not smart enough to be writing this article.
Well, insult notwithstanding, I was (with dry humor, I thought) acknowledging that until this happened only people who had to wear respirators in their job — a class that included almost no journalists who frequently the terms interchangeably — really understood the difference between respirators and masks.
I’m not Jewish, but the only item of clothing I’ll wear that my government dictates will be a yellow star of David. Or maybe a Scarlett letter.
Civil disobedience is a thing. I don’t need any regulations that self identify the new Jews for persecution (ie those of us not living in fear and who don’t want others to be coerced or group-thinked into doing the same.
Well, the government dictates that you wear pants in public. Just saying. But more to the point, civil disobedience is no call to angry at the store employee, the police officer charged with guarding the capitol, and so forth. Surely you believe that if a shop owner wants to require the wearing of masks it is his right to do, no?
It is still found that 99% of infections are from touching surfaces then your face. Have you watched people wearing masks and how they are adjusting them constantly? My bet as well is that throwaway masks are worn over and over again, and cloth masks are not washed or sanitized properly.
Probably right. The masks probably do not protect the wearer at all, and might make it more likely that the wearer get infected.
Where is it found that 99% of infections are from touching a surface then face? I call shenanigans without a cite to a reputable scientific paper.
Here is why I believe wearing a mask is not only virtue signaling, but harmful to boot.
A reason masks have not typically been advised for non medical professionals is that “civilians” are neither trained to use them properly, nor do they engage in activities which make proper use even vaguely feasible. For example, in a medical facility there are ample opportunities for professionals to sterilize their hands. In the real world, not so much.
Why does that matter? Two examples. 1) Asymptomatic carrier wears mask. Carrier breathes virus into mask to a saturation point. If carrier touches or adjusts mask, virus transfers immediately to hands, and away we go. 2) Uninfected person wears mask. If person touches anything carrier in example 1 did, boom. Person then touches or adjusts mask. Boom. Virus is on mask, and due to the nature of the mask can now be either drawn through via inhalation, expelled into the eyes via directed exhalation (mask deflects both upwards and downwards) or via now coated fingers.
In order to actually be effective, wearers have to:
-wash their hands before they ever touch their mask for any reason.
-wash their hands after touching their mask for any reason.
-properly sterilize their mask every night.
Not going to happen. The odds of direct inhalation of an expelled particle are lower than the accumulated risk factors in wearing a mask improperly, which close in on metaphysical certainty.
I know all of that is true in the media setting. The point of the mask is not, however, to protect the wearer. The question is this: Is a person in a high contact job — cashier in a grocery store, for example — better off if everybody who passes before him in a day wears a mask? I suspect the answer is yes. The point of the mask is not to protect the already infected. (I should say as well that I believe am less likely to touch my face wearing the mask than not, insofar as it reminds me not to touch my face.) And a final point: If masks don’t work and are counterproductive for Covid-19, why do Asian countries require them?
Mask wearing vastly increases the risk to front facing employees, for the reasons I outline in example 1. An asymptomatic carrier will be much more likely to have a transmissible infection on their hands, which endangers those employees.
As to some Asian cultures having a lower infection rate, therefore maskwearing works… Pakistan (among many other cultures that don’t wear masks) has a lower death rate than all of them, and the wild majority of the USA has an infection rate that’s almost statistical noise compared to New York city. New Jersey, and Detroit.
As to why some Asian cultures wear masks more prevalently… I think a) masks, even poorly worn, do a decent job against the general flu/cold, so in the hyper packed, densely populated urban centers in Asian culture they may serve a viable purpose and b) many of those regions that wear masks also have significant pollution issues, so air quality is a consideration more than viral efficacy.
Agree on all of that as far as it goes. However, (i) that is not a reason to be harsh to the store employee, and, more to the point of the post (ii) how does a stranger know you are even trying to be careful (say, by washing hands)? It seems to me that the mask is gaining currency as a marker of trying to do the right thing. Doesn’t that reduce aggregate anxiety, and isn’t that a good thing? (I must say that I have been surprised by the emotion around this issue in general. It seems to me that anything that reduces anxiety, even if not substantively very useful, will accelerate the return of economic life. Isn’t that what we all want and need?)
Agree on the employee thing, although that’s something of a misdirect since there are vanishingly few justifications for being verbally aggressive with a service worker.
As to the other point, you have effectively substantiated the case for masks being an exercise in virtue signaling. Their actual efficacy is, at best, in doubt… and they may even have an adverse impact. The position that ‘never mind all that, they make people feel safer’ is the epitome of empty virtue signaling… and another of the reasons masks were not suggested is that they, wait for it, provide a false sense of security. You’re treating perhaps the greatest reason to not wear them as a feature.
At least from my perspective, the reason this issue generates the interest it does is that it’s almost a stalking horse for a wider infringement on rights. If “making some percentage of people feel better/safer” becomes a pre-eminent consideration in public life… where does that train end?
The Second Amendment is gone right away, yes? There’s a not-insignificant number of people who’d prefer there to be few to no firearms.
What about the First Amendment? The “speech is violence” movement has been trying to gain momentum for a while now. Wouldn’t the government now have a justification for litigating speech that makes someone feel “unsafe”?
How about freedom of religion? How long would it take for someone to “feel threatened” by the existence of a Catholic church?
I have little to no confidence in the modern left to contemplate these issues with calm deliberation. I suspect they would approach them much like fire does a California hillside in fall.
We WANT that kid in the store to contact the damn virus so we can move on! I literally don’t understand what is so hard to understand here. And, I’m sorry if he’s scared, he’s NO REASON TO BE.
Playing into his fear to show “solidarity” is actually frightening to me. How can you not see this? Boggles the mind.
This. The virus doesn’t frighten me, I’ve read enough about it to know that it’s well in the range of a bad flu. What scares me is the huge number of people who are frightened by the virus, because I’ve read enough to know that there are few things more dangerous than a large number of scared people.
I know a lot of people believe as you do, and the Swedes, with a much healthier and homogeneous population, are running that experiment. For Americans, with all our co-morbidities, I think the quest for herd immunity via infection rather than vaccination would end up killing a great many more people than we imagine. We may end up there if a vaccine does not come along or if people will not maintain good practices as the economy reopens, but it seems to me that is Plan B. IMHO, the better plan A is to reopen the economy with as many incremental safe practices as are possible, each one of which might reduce Rt, and hope to get to a vaccine quickly so that we don’t lose 1,500,000 people to this in the next 18 months instead of 150,000 or so.
This piece was WRONG on virtually every point, except the part about the experts’ deceiving the general populace.
Complete illogic and misinformation. Horrible.
How so?
Here’s the tell on the virulence of C-19 and the claims and actions of the various political agencies like the CDC: just look at grocery store retail employees. They were and continue to be the very front lines of general public exposure, as opposed to the medical professionals in selected contact with potentially infected individuals.
There were no masks involved until very recently; here in Illinois, a month and a half after the initial lockdown.
Yet these people, in close contact with the general public by the uncountable (and “untested”) thousands, are not dropping dead in droves. In fact, our local large grocery store has pretty much lost no one to C-19.
There’s your real-world test of transmission and mortality.
It’s a disease. Worse than some, less bad than others. But it’s not some magical death-ray that kills everyone within a mile.
“It’s a disease. Worse than some, less bad than others. But it’s not some magical death-ray that kills everyone within a mile.”
I’m 84 years old, and have COPD. From what I read, if I catch Covid-19, my chances of dying range from 13% to around 50%. We all have to go sometime, but I’m trying to write a book and would prefer to stay around for a while (and so would my wife), so I take all available precautions pretty seriously. Perhaps if I were on one of my rare trips to a store, and that store was invaded by a group of unmasked protestors, I would have a case for firing on them in self-defense?
“Your Editor favors this look…”
I favor the ZZ Top beard mask look, extra filtration surface area comes as a bonus.
Dear Editor,
Great post! (But I’m biased – I agree with the large majority of what you said.)
Given your intellectual approach, I strongly recommend the following tutorial / game by an epidemiologist to learn a lot more about the covid-19 pandemic, including a very interesting claim about the role of masks. Your dark house post leads me to think you’ll appreciate the reasoning.
https://ncase.me/covid-19/ <— visit here for a good time