If it just goes unchecked exponentialy for 2 months then significant fraction of world population will die. Like 2-digit percentage.

Not only that, demographically the hardest hit population (80+) are not in the time of their lives where they spend the bulk of their money nor are they in the most productive time of their lives.

See https://youtu.be/BYTFk34nhoI from the 10 to 12 minute mark.

At which point, once we have fast and reliable testing, we can actually start having people go out more and reduce the isolation, since we can count on better testing to stop the spread.

My niece and great nephews in Victoria, BC just turned up with symptoms for COVID. They were told to self-quarantine and were not tested.

You cannot believe the numbers from any country which does not have a robust testing regime. That emphatically includes Canada along with the USA.

That's not to suggest that 18% of the population is infected. Merely suggests that positive tests is a useless metric because people are not tested.

Number of people admitted to hospital might be a better indicator -- though this has a lot of delay.

It's a symptom of massive under-testing and would be greatly alleviated by an inexpensive test.

Yet the messaging until recently was "no evidence of community spread, risk remains low" with very lukewarm response. Of course there is no evidence if you don't look for it.

I understand they don't want to incite panic but anyone who's been paying attention to other countries can see that community spread is inevitable unless you have strict measures and robust testing, very early on. I'm pissed our politicians have ignored lessons from other countries.

I think this site may be paywalled unfortunately (but there is just a $1 for the first month charge):

https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06...

The second graph in there shows Canada is tracking exactly the same path as most European countries and the US.

Exponential growth at the current rate would have it burning through the global population by the end of June, but since exponential growth becomes logistic growth after an appreciable fraction of the population is infected, June is probably closer to the halfway point than the end date.

And that's assuming zero curve flattening. The entire point of flattening the curve is to draw it out so that hospitals continue to function for longer. But this also makes the pandemic last longer.

A vaccine isn't expected for over a year, and even then, I'd expect at least a few months of logistical difficulties getting enough manufactured, distributed, and administered, especially given the state that hospitals will likely be in.

We would be screwed, IMHO, based on the current mitigation strategies around curve flattening that are not being communicated realistically to the public. The crop of shutdowns over the weekend were billed as 2-3 weeks.. Err, what? How are we even going to know what effect that's having without massive blanket testing? Then, nobody seems to believe anything less than 8 weeks is enough; and that's full-blown lock-down not fractions of half measures.

But as you say, the just spreads it out. So what happens in 8 weeks when we still can't let up the restrictions because if we did that the number of cases would just explode again among the uninfected population? If we aren't turning the corner by June and getting the 40% of adults who can't afford $400 in an emergency back to work..

I'm sympathetic to the UKs strategy and hope the best for them.

Exactly. People seem to be mistaking the incubation period (~two weeks) for the length of time the pandemic will last (months at minimum).

It's impossible to have a perfect quarantine, so if we were to all go back to normal after a month, the pandemic growth curve will pick up where it left off. Exiting the lockdown will need to be done super carefully to avoid this outcome.

As far as I can tell, this is probably going to be the new normal until we have a vaccine.

An Imperial College paper [1] out today predicts this under its most stringent suppression scenario; see the chart on page 10.

[1] https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...

Do the math on those "flatten the curve" graphs and work out the X-axis given the projected infection rates (20%-60% of population), hospitalisation rate (15%-30%), days in hospital required (6-9) and the number of beds available.

This ends with a vaccine or a mutation that gives (partial?) immunity and a lower death rate.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2019-02-origami-d...

I heard the mask production automation lines cost $50K to $100 in China and TW. Now the price for machines and production materials are 5-10 times the normal.

But once setup, 95% - 99% of the process is automated. There are zero pollution and it is neither labor nor capital intensive. Do need the logistic and abilities to source some raw materials. If setup, the next few months would be like printing $$$$.

TW can make 10 millions masks per day now. China has production line making 110 millions mask per day. They were able mobilized the industries like war time - TW actually send enlist Army personnels to the factory to help out.

This is probably OK for ice cream and computer hardware. Less so for medical supplies.

I think the big issue is supply for medical staff. There's a limited supply of legit masks. Medical staff need masks more. We need medical staff more. And the masks are more effective with training / other procedures in place. Other than that - if the masks didn't help you, medical staff wouldn't wear them.

So yes, with supply being low, it's far more useful for infected people to not spread said droplets.

Over here, supply doesn't seem to be low. Lots of smoke recently meant lots of masks in the supply chain. I'm surprised I see so few worn in the shops though, especially since I spent a lot of time in Asia where masks were common during flu season.

Even simpler--don't wear a mask for yourself, but for others.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19193267 “We found that adherence to mask use significantly reduced the risk for ILI-associated infection”

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD... “Surgical masks or N95 respirators were the most consistent and comprehensive [physical intervention] supportive measures.”

They're trying to conserve masks for health care professionals, and DEFINITELY don't want people using "I'm wearing a mask" as an excuse to go out when they should just stay home, but I can't imagine they don't help a lot.

Imo, this all or nothing thinking is contemporary issue that plays out in many contexts and we collectivelly really should get out of it.

Basic masks can be beneficial for a short time. They need to be replaced at least every hour in order for the benefit to persist. This is routine in a hospital, but is simply impractical for most normal people.

(If a mask stops a droplet containing virus, the virus doesn't disappear. Your own breath and fine droplets keeps the mask material warm and humid—making the mask material great environment for the virus to hang out and spread through the fabric until it can be breathed directly into your lung where it can do the most damage.)

If we only had enough masks, that is.

Masks are only effective in a fairly immediate radius: someone coughs, that droplet goes a little ways then falls on a surface. Medical professionals are in that immediate radius all the time, that's why they need the masks. People are usually not sneezing directly on each other, so that's less of an issue. What IS an issue is the viral particle that is now on a surface. You touch that, move your hand to your face (perhaps to adjust your mask) and bingo you're infected. Washing your hands obsessively is WAY more useful than any mask.

Most of the time in medicine masks are used to stop the medical professional from contaminating the patient, not the other way around (that's what you see in surgery). If you're with someone sick, it would be good to give them a mask, they'll spread fewer particles that way.

TLDR: Masks are minimally useful for the broader public, very useful for those directly in harm's way. Don't buy masks unless you're sick, or someone close to you is sick. Let the supply chain work for medical professionals who actually need them.

That's not to say do or don't do it, just be careful. Handwashing and not touching your face are the single most important things to do.

> Data shows that homemade masks made with a single layer of cotton clothing, or a tea towel can remove around 50-60% of virus-sized particles.

slowhand09 has been unfairly downvoted, because they are factually correct. Epidemiologists are telling the public not to use masks because PPE needs training.

Of course masks are useful, but they're more useful in hospitals / on health care workers' face, than on the average citizen which won't be in contact with the virus that much now that most of the world is starting to get locked down anyway

Have you seen any of them cite a research paper showing that? I haven't, I'm open to suggestions if anyone has one.

Same thing with the "keeping schools open won't spread the virus" thing in the UK; lots of establishment scientists saying "trust us" but a dearth of papers detailing how the established beliefs are wrong that schools are prime transmission vectors for ARI (and closing them has helped to hinder influenza trasmissions in the past).

Not being snarky; if you've got backing for "masks don't hinder viral spread" then lets see it.

The only kind of mask that's going to filter particulate matter out of the air (i.e., be effective against the virus for someone who is not infected) is something that has an airtight seal.

For normal person? They are mostly useless. Only for people, who are already sick, to stop them from spreading virus further. Wearing mask by healthy person doesn't make sense, because there is not much to stop viruses with coming in contact with your eyes. You are always a scratch away from bringing those viruses into your body, negating any benefit from mask. And most of mask, you can buy currently are not dense enough to capture viruses.

OP is correct, unless you are sick or medical worker, you don't need mask. Don't buy them, hospitals need them much more than you.

Is WHO [1] good enough source for you?

[1] https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2...

They say "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with suspected 2019-nCoV infection."

That assumes you're doing everything else to protect yourself already, like stay away from crowded places.

It also assumes that you know that you're healthy. You could be carrying COVID-19 without knowing it!

One reason health practitioners wear masks is not to infect vulnerable patients with something they might be carrying.

> there is not much to stop viruses with coming in contact with your eyes.

Other than the goggles that you mentioned; yet, nurses in hospitals don't routinely wear goggles, yet do wear masks.

This is probably because your eyes do not suck in air the way your air passages do, and also don't spew viruses into the air.

There is a reason why South Korea officially distributes masks to the public. Everybody in China and Japan wears masks, too.

Um, this is kinda what ordinary people want!!

If you stop it spreading, then most of us don't get it!

Yes, it doesn't stop you getting it, but if it stops you spreading it then we hinder/stop the epidemic [but we're way past that now].

I can't see how reducing transmission "isn't helping".

Sure, they are not as good as respirators. And we as general public should not bulk buy them now.

https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/diy-homemade-mask-protec...

Has more info on studies related to this. I believe their claim is that tying a cloth around your nose/mouth is 50% as effective as a proper mask.

Maybe my country is outlier, but doctors in non surgical situation use mask (not respirator) and no googles. It is not airtight either.

I don't think they do it because it would be useless.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html#protect

CDC does not recommend that people who are well wear a facemask to protect themselves from respiratory illnesses, including COVID-19. You should only wear a mask if a healthcare professional recommends it. A facemask should be used by people who have COVID-19 and are showing symptoms. This is to protect others from the risk of getting infected. The use of facemasks also is crucial for health workers and other people who are taking care of someone infected with COVID-19 in close settings (at home or in a health care facility).

Only wear a mask if you are ill with COVID-19 symptoms (especially coughing) or looking after someone who may have COVID-19. Disposable face mask can only be used once. If you are not ill or looking after someone who is ill then you are wasting a mask. There is a world-wide shortage of masks, so WHO urges people to use masks wisely.

WHO advises rational use of medical masks to avoid unnecessary wastage of precious resources and mis-use of masks (see Advice on the use of masks).

The most effective ways to protect yourself and others against COVID-19 are to frequently clean your hands, cover your cough with the bend of elbow or tissue and maintain a distance of at least 1 meter (3 feet) from people who are coughing or sneezing. See basic protective measures against the new coronavirus for more information.

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-coronaviruses

Only wear a mask if you are ill with COVID-19 symptoms (especially coughing) or looking after someone who may have COVID-19. Disposable face mask can only be used once. If you are not ill or looking after someone who is ill then you are wasting a mask. There is a world-wide shortage of masks, so WHO urges people to use masks wisely.

WHO advises rational use of medical masks to avoid unnecessary wastage of precious resources and mis-use of masks (see Advice on the use of masks).

The most effective ways to protect yourself and others against COVID-19 are to frequently clean your hands, cover your cough with the bend of elbow or tissue and maintain a distance of at least 1 meter (3 feet) from people who are coughing or sneezing. See basic protective measures against the new coronavirus for more information.

They don't say it useless, just they not recommend it

They can be cleaned. It's not ideal, but very likely better than nothing. Sorry, can't find link, but they tried a variety of different techniques to hit on one that worked.