[continued from previous message]

authoritative, and some merely visible and persuasive, are saying, on the
basis of very limited evidence, that masks *might* be good for you, and, besides, what could it hurt?

Let's look at the (remarkably few) benefits, and the (much greater) risks. There are *quite a number* of reasons that it might hurt a *lot*.

The first is, what do you mean by "masks"? There are dust masks, that are intended to keep you from breathing in relatively large particles like
sawdust. There are surgical masks, which look almost identical to dust
masks, but are made differently and of different materials and to different standards, intended to keep you from breathing (or, more realistically, spitting) out droplets of who-knows- what over patients with open wounds.
There are slightly form fitting masks made of specially porous materials
that provide a larger surface to breath through and so filter smaller particles, droplets, and some aerosols out of the air you are breathing
in. (These also tend to catch most droplets that you are breathing out, but probably not all, and not aerosols, since, when you breath out, your breath tends to push the mask away from your face, and allow your breath, aerosols, and some droplets to escape above, below, and to the sides of the mask. The same happens with dust and surgical masks.) Then there are extended form fitting respirators, many with integrated face or eye shields, and with
filters to deal with specific particle sizes.

And then there are home made masks, fashioned from whatever fabric is to
hand, to whatever design comes to mind, with little or no regard for
porosity, size of weave, or the ability to trap whatever particles are being breathed in or out. Just last night, on the nightly news, the news anchor proudly showed off a face mask that his wife had crafted. It had a lovely pattern on the fabric, and was lined with plastic from a bag. Excuse me? *Plastic*? Non-breathable, non-porous plastic? I'm not sure what that is supposed to do. Any breathing is going to take place around the edges of
the mask. A normal person, under no effort or stress, is probably not going
to be harmed by it, but anybody with respiratory problems who uses it may be
in serious difficulty. It may, almost accidentally, trap droplets that are breathed out, but otherwise I can't see any possible benefit at all.

The second major issue is the "evidence" for the benefit of masks. There
seem to be two points of evidence.

The first piece of evidence is that nurses and medical techs wear masks.
You can see them. They are the "face" of the medical system, and, these
days, that face is covered with a mask. Obviously, masks are important.

"Obvious", as we say in mathematics, is what you say when you can't prove
it. You do see nurses, medical techs, emergency first responders (on the news), and staff in intensive care units (on the news) wearing masks. You can't help but notice the masks. You *don't* notice gowns (changed between patients), gloves (changed between patients), face shields, and constant, everlasting hand-washing. You also don't see the vastly higher
probabilities that these people will encounter the virus, nor the fact that
the gowns (changed between patients), gloves (changed between patients), and masks (changed between patients) are intended as much to protect you as the medical staff. (Nor the "public relations" and "social engineering" aspects
of "security theatre" intended to sooth fears in a time of poorly understood crisis. There *are* non-medical reasons to wear masks in some situations.)

The second piece of evidence is an "observation" (one cannot call it a
study) that some populations with a high incidence of mask-wearing have significantly lower transmission rates of the virus. (You cannot call the observation a "study," since the sample size is very small. We are talking about whole countries (of which there are less than 200), and not just countries, but "countries with high rates of CoVID-19" which takes you down
to a double handful. "A double handful" is not a statistically valid sample set.) There are two additional (and easily observable) factors that may
affect the transmission rate without recourse to the idea that masks prevent infection. The first is that masks are, demonstrably, effective at reducing the probability that those who have the virus (and twenty-five to fifty
percent of those who are infected show few or no symptoms and don't know
they are infected) will directly pass the virus to others. (Masks, of
pretty much any kind, tend to vastly reduce the droplets breathed or spit
out by those infected, simply by trapping the droplets as they come into contact with the fabric or paper of the mask.) The second factor is that
those countries with low transmission rates also have some pretty
authoritarian governments, who can effectively and quickly mandate that
people have to stay home and isolate themselves.

But, I hear you cry, while all of this calls into question the effectiveness
of masks, it still doesn't show that masks (other than the plastic lined
ones) are harmful. So, who's hurt if I choose to wear a mask?

Well, first off, we currently have a world-wide shortage of proper masks
(and other medical equipment). If you are wearing a mask and don't need it, you may be (likely are) depriving some front line worker who may actually
need it. In fact, if you have a proper mask these days, you probably got it
on the black market, and you are, even if only in a small way, supporting criminal activity that extends up to massive theft of hospital supplies and
the fraudulent production of "certified" medical equipment that is not up to *anybody's* standard. So you are probably hurting those doing the most to
keep us safe. (And from there on down to legitimate manufacturers and the legitimate economy.)

And, even if you have made your own, probably ineffective, mask, you may be hurting yourself. We *know* that frequent, even obsessive, handwashing is effective. We *know* that physical distancing and self-isolation are effective. We *know* that keeping from touching your face is important. Wearing a mask gives you a feeling of security and safety. An almost
certainly *false* sense of security and safety. And if wearing a mask makes you feel more comfortable and you stop, or even reduce, constant
handwashing, or are less careful about physical distancing, or go out more frequently, you are putting yourself (and likely others) at greater risk.
And we also *know* that properly donning and doffing a face mask is a non-trivial task, and most people don't know how to do it properly. (By the way, if you made your own mask, how many did you make? How often do you launder them? With bleach? (Where can you *find* bleach these days?) Do
you change masks *every* time you go out? And do you touch your face when
you put your mask on? Or take it off?)

With your own, homemade masks, you *might* be protecting others, but it's
not likely. Yes, masks trap droplets, but that only matters if you are infected. Even if you live in Italy, there is only one chance in 600 that
you have the virus. And if you *know* you are infected, wearing a mask does nothing if you are alone at home. If you are infected, you should be home alone. What are you doing going out if you are infected? Do you *want* to kill people?

Okay. You wanna wear a mask when you go out? During the virus crisis, if
you must go out, note that you might get coughed on or sneezed on, and,
since disinfecting fabric is much more difficult than cleaning flat
surfaces, you should wear older clothing that can be discarded if necessary. (If you have old torn clothing that will not be missed, this is probably
best.) Since face masks are in short supply, a scarf worn over the mouth, nose, and lower part of the face may offer some protection. If you *are* infected, and must go out for some reason, take a staff to aid you in
walking, should you be overcome with respiratory distress and need something
to lean on. Best to have bells hanging from the top to summon aid if
needed. As you go, it is best to give some verbal warning to others not to come into close contact. Since some you may encounter may not be proficient
in English, it is probably a good idea to constantly call out something
simple, such as, "Unclean! Unclean!"

(This is not meant to make fun of anyone who actually *has* Hansen's Disease ...)

Masks are not magic. Since there is as-close-to-zero-as-makes-no-difference evidence that masks prevent normal people, in normal situations, from
getting infected, those who believe that masks help obviously believe in
magic. "Magical thinking" will not help us in this virus crisis. And it
may do an awful lot of harm.

Now go wash your hands. (And, if you have any actual, medical grade masks,
go and give them to a front line medical worker.)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2020 22:12:54 +0800
From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
To: Rob Slade <rmslade@shaw.ca>

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/03/science/coronavirus-genome-bad-news-wrapped-in-protein.html
cguaggaauguggcaacuuuacaaacuuuacaa...
As NSP12 duplicates the coronavirus genome, it sometimes adds a wrong
letter to the new copy. NSP14 cuts out these errors, so that the correct
letter can be added instead.
gcugaaaauguaacaggacucuuuaaagauugu...

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 11:11:11 -0800
From: RISKS-request@csl.sri.com
Subject: Abridged info on RISKS (comp.risks)

The ACM RISKS Forum is a MODERATED digest. Its Usenet manifestation is
comp.risks, the feed for which is donated by panix.com as of June 2011.

SUBSCRIPTIONS: The mailman Web interface can be used directly to

subscribe and unsubscribe:
http://mls.csl.sri.com/mailman/listinfo/risks

SUBMISSIONS: to risks@CSL.sri.com with meaningful SUBJECT: line that

includes the string `notsp'. Otherwise your message may not be read.
*** This attention-string has never changed, but might if spammers use it.

SPAM challenge-responses will not be honored. Instead, use an alternative

address from which you never send mail where the address becomes public!

The complete INFO file (submissions, default disclaimers, archive sites,

copyright policy, etc.) is online.
<http://www.CSL.sri.com/risksinfo.html>
*** Contributors are assumed to have read the full info file for guidelines!

OFFICIAL ARCHIVES: http://www.risks.org takes you to Lindsay Marshall's

searchable html archive at newcastle:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/VL.IS --> VoLume, ISsue.
Also, ftp://ftp.sri.com/risks for the current volume
or ftp://ftp.sri.com/VL/risks-VL.IS for previous VoLume
If none of those work for you, the most recent issue is always at
http://www.csl.sri.com/users/risko/risks.txt, and index at /risks-31.00
Lindsay has also added to the Newcastle catless site a palmtop version
of the most recent RISKS issue and a WAP version that works for many but
not all telephones: http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/w/r
ALTERNATIVE ARCHIVES: http://seclists.org/risks/ (only since mid-2001)
*** NOTE: If a cited URL fails, we do not try to update them. Try
browsing on the keywords in the subject line or cited article leads.
Apologies for what Office365 and SafeLinks may have done to URLs.

Special Offer to Join ACM for readers of the ACM RISKS Forum:

<http://www.acm.org/joinacm1>

------------------------------

End of RISKS-FORUM Digest 31.65
************************

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)