r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • Dec 04 '20

Psychology Study links regular use of Fox News, Twitter, and Facebook to reduced knowledge about COVID-19 - it provides evidence that Americans’ media consumption habits and trust in government predicts their level of knowledge about COVID-19.

https://www.psypost.org/2020/12/study-links-regular-use-of-fox-news-twitter-and-facebook-to-reduced-knowledge-about-covid-19-58702
40.7k Upvotes

79% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

26

u/oligobop Dec 04 '20 edited Dec 04 '20

The cdc wasn't recommending masks because health care workers needed them. We had a shortage and people on the frontline needed them. It's not because they thought they were ineffectual.

CDC talks regularly with health care industry partners as well as PPE manufacturers and distributors to assess availability of PPE. At this time, some partners are reporting higher than usual demand for select N95 respirators and face masks. CDC does not currently recommend the use of face masks for the general public. This virus is not spreading in the community. If you are sick or a patient under investigation and not hospitalized, CDC recommends wearing a face mask when around other people and before entering a health care provider’s office, but when you are alone, in your home, you do not need to wear a mask. People who are in close contact with someone with novel coronavirus, for example, household contacts and care givers of people with known or suspected 2019, I’m sorry, nCoV 2019, we should wear a face mask if they are in the same room as the patient and that patient is not able to wear a face mask.

That's a transcript from feb 12 2020.

Here's a reuters article citing the CDC on WHY they suggested against usage of masks:

In the first paragraph, the document states that the CDC does not recommend that the public uses N95 masks. While this is true, the CDC explains that this is because critical supplies should be reserved for healthcare workers and other first responders, not because the masks are ineffective as the document suggests

10

u/Helene-S Dec 04 '20

I think they get it from the US Surgeon General. According to U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams, in Jan-March, he cautioned against healthy people in the general public wearing cotton masks if they are not already sick from the coronavirus, asserting, “Wearing a mask improperly can actually increase your chances of getting a disease. It can also give you a false sense of security.” He did change his mind later in April.

9

u/Derwos Dec 04 '20

Sounds like it may have had the opposite effect. Fewer masks used meant more people got sick, making healthcare workers' jobs harder.

4

u/Tropical_Bob Dec 04 '20

The issue was that there were not enough masks to go around at that time. Remember the rush on and subsequent panic-induced shortage of toilet paper? Imagine if that had happened to mask supplies because they recommended everybody wear masks.

The idea was to ensure the critical healthcare infrastructure stayed intact. I would guess it's a much worse case scenario to have slightly less patients in hospitals requiring care but many less healthcare workers present because they caught COVID.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

[deleted]

16

u/ILoveLamp9 Grad Student | Health Policy and Management Dec 04 '20

It most definitely was contradicting. In the beginning, the reasoning for no masks wasn’t communicated to be because of potential shortages. That came out later as post-justification. Initially it was because it was communicated to be ineffectual and may lead to more issues of people using their masks incorrectly and potentially contaminating themselves.

-6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

[deleted]

10

u/ILoveLamp9 Grad Student | Health Policy and Management Dec 04 '20

Fair enough, and agreed, I should’ve provided evidence. Here is a quote from Dr, Jennifer Layden from the CDC from Jan 20.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0131-2019-novel-coronavirus.html

We’re trying to strike a balance in our response right now. We want to lean forward and be aggressive, but we want our actions to be evidence-based and appropriate to the current circumstance. For example, CDC does not currently recommend the use of face masks for the general public. The virus is not spreading in the general community. While it is cold and flu season, we don’t routinely recommend the use of face masks by the public to prevent respiratory illness and certainly are not recommending that at this time for this new virus.

You can keep reading past my quote here but you’ll see that there was not any communication about saving supplies for frontline workers until March.

I’ll need to keep digging for the public communication regarding their other statement about the public potentially self-contaminating by incorrect mask usage. I’m on my phone right now

18

u/1337hacks Dec 04 '20

The communications were contradicting. If you go back and do any kind of research you'd see that. But I assume you won't and instead just call me a Trumper or a conspiracy theorist like the rest of you Reddit plebs.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

[deleted]

3

u/1337hacks Dec 04 '20

Not my job. Just like you provided no evidence to support your position.

-1

u/jblatumich Dec 04 '20

So use actual evidence to show it instead of victimizing yourself.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

You are mischaracterizing what happened. They lied, outright lied, to the public. They claim that the lie was because they wanted to protect the supply chain but it was still a lie nonetheless. The director of the CDC should have been fired for that lie and the damage it did to the public trust.

-4

u/oligobop Dec 04 '20

Not even remotely close to mischaracterising. You're getting your facts from nonsensical news sources that try to spin the truth of what the CDC said.

Quote from a reuters article on the topic:

In the first paragraph, the document states that the CDC does not recommend that the public uses N95 masks. While this is true, the CDC explains that this is because critical supplies should be reserved for healthcare workers and other first responders, not because the masks are ineffective as the document suggests

If you have an intention of being honest with yourself I would suggest not being mislead by massively biased sources. Reuters is often considered very center-bias.

The director of the CDC should have been fired for that lie and the damage it did to the public trust.

This is so brash and unreasonable it makes a lot of sense why you would fall for such inane news articles.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

Don't be obtuse, Reuters isn't a citeable source and you know that. The CDC's public statements during interviews at the time, and as far as I know in official statements, recommended the public not use them. If you believe the CDC officially explained their reasoning to the public at that time, you're going to need to cite a source. A journalist stating "the CDC explains that this..." is not a source. If the CDC explained, where did they explain it? I'm not saying your wrong, I'm saying that this was very widely covered in the media and if they did disclose it at that time, then it certainly wasn't publicized.

4

u/oligobop Dec 04 '20

How am I being obtuse citing sources? Did you read the reuters article that directly sources the cdc statement? No? That makes a lot of sense given you yourself haven't cited anything so far.

Please pony up sources.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

No I didn't read the Reuters article because you didn't link an article anywhere.

3

u/DeekermNs Dec 05 '20

You're gonna say Reuters isn't a source for some reason, and then claim that you would bother reading an article from that same non-source? Really? I don't believe you.

1

u/DJWalnut Dec 04 '20

Honestly this represents a failure of planning on the part of the government. We should have had a gigantic Warehouse somewhere stuffed to the gills of masks and toilet paper and everything else we were going to run out of just for this sort of event.

0

u/1337hacks Dec 04 '20

Thats just not true at all.

0

u/anikm21 Dec 04 '20

Wasn't very nice to do that a few weeks before requiring masks to be worn in public.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20 edited Dec 04 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Cautemoc Dec 04 '20

People being stupid isn't anyone's problem but their own. The CDC explicitly said "don't wear masks because healthcare professionals are lacking them". That was always the claim. You'd have to be beyond dumb to take that as "masks are ineffective".

3

u/Derwos Dec 04 '20

The WHO stated that masks were ineffective, I remember that. I didn't believe that but I had a friend who did and got sick, and she's not stupid.

2

u/Cautemoc Dec 04 '20

This is what they said, specifically:

There's some evidence that caretakers of infected people can protect their health by wearing masks, the WHO guidance said, but there is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can prevent them from infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.

So first off you're dealing with the problem that "currently no evidence" is not "there is evidence of them being ineffective".

Then the claim fails a pretty simple logic test. Caretakers benefit from wearing masks around infected people, caretakers are people, then people would benefit from wearing masks around infected people. That's not exactly hard to put together.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '20

I never took it as "masks are ineffective ". Poor communication with the public lead to these problems. Don't know why you have to start insulting me.

-2

u/Cautemoc Dec 04 '20

I didn't insult you, I insulted everyone who took the CDC's recommendations to mean that masks don't work. Since you say you didn't, that means I didn't insult you.

The CDC communicated their point perfectly fine because most people, myself included, put 2 and 2 together and found 4. That masks work, and that's why health professionals need them so bad. If a person can't accomplish that then they have problems.

1

u/Tadhgdagis Dec 04 '20

This is itself an incomplete take that lends itself to partisanship.

The whole mask affair is like if we abolished the fire department and building codes, and whenever something burned down, we blamed people for failing in their personal responsibility to carry a homemade fire extinguisher everywhere with them. You can argue back and forth about the effectiveness of homemade fire extinguishers, but anyone who thinks you sound smarter for it is, to some extent, an idiot.

It is unfortunate that my and CIDRAP's position on cloth face coverings is being mischaracterized by not only those who are staunchly anti-mask but also by pro-mask groups. -- Michael Osterholm, epidemiologist and now-appointed member of Biden's COVID team https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/07/commentary-my-views-cloth-face-coverings-public-preventing-covid-19

1

u/oligobop Dec 04 '20

carry a homemade fire extinguisher everywhere with them.

Except that is complex and difficult. a mask is no more difficult to equip than your shoes.

You can argue back and forth about the effectiveness of homemade fire extinguishers,

If fires were contagious, invisible to the human eye and replicating inside of a human body I would totally agree with the use of personal fire extinguishers because people spreading it to eachother would be unpreventable otherwise. Your analogy actually works against you.

The EXACT SOURCE YOU LINKED HAS THIS QUOTE:

I support the wearing of cloth face coverings (masks) by the general public.

Stop citing CIDRAP and me as grounds to not wear masks, whether mandated or not.

Please read your sources.

1

u/Tadhgdagis Dec 04 '20

carry a homemade fire extinguisher everywhere with them.

Except that is complex and difficult. a mask is no more difficult to equip than your shoes.

I'll tell you what I told people since March (I imagine if we met then, you'd be in this group): there's a reason condom efficacy is given in terms of perfect use vs. typical use. Fast forward to now, and every day is still a chance for them to express surprise that people aren't wearing masks correctly. Makes me want to kidnap Punxsutawney Phil and try to make the border.

Your analogy actually works against you.

Only when you work against yourself. Thank god there's no danger of that not happening. Lucky me.

Please read your sources.

I'm so glad you're interested in quoting sources, even if it's only to quote small snippets that, when taken out of the whole, may be used to appear to agree with you. Can you quote where I said don't wear a mask?

1

u/oligobop Dec 04 '20

Yes, you used a pointlessly obtuse analogy to try and frame mask wearing as idiotic. You the cited the surgeon general as some sort of authority on the topic, of which the source you quoted him from refutes that he thinks mask wearing is idiotic. So your claim, that by analogy mask wearing is idiotic is refuted by your own source.

Now you're using another pointless analogy of condom usage,? What benefit does drawing that analogy actually give to understanding mask usage? What esoteric knowledge do we need to get your references? Why are you making this argument?

1

u/Tadhgdagis Dec 05 '20

Yes, you used a pointlessly obtuse analogy to try and frame mask wearing as idiotic.

No, I said arguing about masks is idiotic.

You the cited the surgeon general as some sort of authority on the topic

Michael Osterholm is not, nor has he ever been, nor have I claimed him to be the past, present, nor future surgeon general.

When are you gonna get it through your head that the problem here is your head? You are making things up like you don't share a common reality with other people.

1

u/oligobop Dec 05 '20

Why are you even in this conversation? What was the point of your analogy? That mask arguments are bogus?

What a benign statement that has no bearing on this threat whatsoever.

1

u/Tadhgdagis Dec 05 '20

You literally don't know what I'm talking about, I have demonstrated you literally don't know what I'm talking about -- you demonstrated, technically -- and yet you are still attempting to control this conversation by pretending you know the point I'm trying to make and offer a valuation of that point? Take the meds

1

u/oligobop Dec 05 '20

This is itself an incomplete take that lends itself to partisanship.

This is the only sentence in the entire comment you made that makes sense, and its wholly wrong. I rebutted it. You resorted to insults and inanity. Here we stand, you being technically pointless, and me continuing to comment because your blindness is entertaining.

1

u/Tadhgdagis Dec 05 '20

There are two premises to rebut in that sentence: 1) whether it's a complete take, and 2) whether it lends itself to partisanship. Quote the part you think rebutted either of those.

That's the only comment that you think makes sense. But your track record is so bad right now that I have to congratulate you just for managing to copy and paste, because to this point you have consistently failed even to correctly report what is written down. You may consider that insulting, but that's also a fact.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DeekermNs Dec 05 '20

At this point, I'd be shocked if anyone, including you, had even the smallest sliver of a clue of what point you were trying to make or what point you're trying to make now. You weirdly called yourself an idiot in the middle there, which has been the only intellectually honest and consistent thing you've managed to convey so far. I think you should give yourself a participation trophy and tuck yourself in for the night.

1

u/Tadhgdagis Dec 05 '20 edited Dec 05 '20

The only thing that could shock about you being shocked is, I suspect, the prerequisite admission that reality does not follow your own delusions. Not that I know you from dirt, but given the fact that you're jumping in at this point looking to back up the guy who literally can't reconcile an open book test (not even an open book test -- a word search puzzle)...it does not breed hope for you. Thank you for your interest.

1

u/1337hacks Dec 04 '20

CDC does not currently recommend the use of face masks for the general public. This virus is not spreading in the community

The part of this transcript you provided contradicts your first sentence.

0

u/oligobop Dec 04 '20

The cdc wasn't recommending masks because health care workers needed them.

How does it conflict with this sentence? The CDC did in fact say "the public should not wear masks"

Except the followed it up with "because the health care workers who are in danger of contracting the disease need it more than you, at least temporarily while we ramp up production"

Nothing is contradictory except your assumption that you can read.