Early COVID Mask Lies

Cluster debates the initial public health guidance claiming masks were ineffective for the general public during the early COVID-19 pandemic, widely viewed as a lie to preserve supplies for healthcare workers, which eroded trust in officials.

πŸ“‰ Falling 0.2x Health
3,270
Comments
7
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#4744
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2020
1,166
2021
1,228
2022
481
2023
190
2024
97
2025
102
2026
8

Keywords

e.g US thestreet.com youtube.com voanews.com WHO N95 IFR slate.com www.cnn masks mask public messaging pandemic wear wearing public health lied medical

Sample Comments

phendrenad2 β€’ Nov 29, 2022 β€’ View on HN

That's a bold opinion, honestly. It seems to me that much of the initial guidance ("masks don't work") was an intentional lie to prevent mask shortages. Do you have evidence otherwise?

hn_throwaway_99 β€’ May 30, 2022 β€’ View on HN

Thank you, thank you, thank you. This is the same bullshit that happened with masks early in the pandemic. Instead of being truthful and saying "It's really important that there be enough masks for hospitals, and we just don't know if masks for the lay populace are helpful because there haven't been enough studies yet," authorities lied and said "masks don't work for the general population". Zeynep Tufekci's article on this topic got it exactly right

astrophysician β€’ Mar 29, 2021 β€’ View on HN

I agree: in retrospect, in todays context, those statements are not good public health policy. And saying "they are not effective in preventing general public from catching coronavirus" may indeed be a false statement, even at the time. But, when masks were in short supply and when it wasn't really known how much protection they provide (so saying "hey masks might help" may give people a false sense of comfort thinking that they're protected and able to live as norm

chc β€’ Aug 4, 2020 β€’ View on HN

The messaging regarding masks was "They don't keep you from getting it, and everyone should be inside right now to avoid spreading it if they have it, so avoid buying a mask to make sure there are enough for people who need them." The messaging regarding masks now is, "They don't keep you from getting it, but they do stop you from spreading it, so since there are enough masks now for everyone, you should wear one." It doesn't seem like a flip-flop so much as re

minikites β€’ Feb 3, 2021 β€’ View on HN

>Our early guidance that masks don’t help (because we needed to save the real masks for healthcare workers)I see this mentioned a lot, is this really a big factor? Did a ton of people genuinely begin the pandemic by believing officials and then after a few weeks start to disbelieve officials? That just doesn't make sense to me. I mostly see this issue used as a bad faith cudgel to justify not wearing a mask now, but someone acting in bad faith would have picked another excuse if it wa

finite_jest β€’ Jan 12, 2022 β€’ View on HN

I think you are being a tad too generous here. That wasn't the explicit messaging. Public health officials and experts did in fact lie and palter in that case. Part of the messaging was explicitly "masks are not effective in preventing general public from catching COIVD" [1] You could reasonably see it as a "noble lie", however.The whole thing is also complicated by the fact that science on surgical masks etc. wasn't (and isn't) that clear. During the 2009 H

waboremo β€’ Mar 26, 2023 β€’ View on HN

Ah I understand the problem, nuance is difficult in public.Most of these weren't unanimous arguments by doctors. Masks for example: it's true they are ineffective at preventing most things, you can't put on a mask and be free of disease from others, it's mostly to spread it from you. At the same time, some masks are more effective than others, when most people were buying up cloth masks they didn't want to discourage this by redirecting to more effective masks especia

gfodor β€’ Jun 4, 2023 β€’ View on HN

No, they didn't just say that, that was the problem. They said that there was no evidence to support the idea that masks were effective against COVID-19. This is the usual weasel word approach of saying "there is no evidence" to support something to lead people to thinking there is counterevidence, which there wasn't. Once they started lying to people this way, it was over.The proper messaging was: "we need to keep the mask supply up for medical workers if it turns ou

Stevvo β€’ Jun 25, 2020 β€’ View on HN

It's unfortunate the relevant authorities lied about the effectiveness of face masks initially. It may have been necessary to ensure adequate supplies for front-line workers, but lying to the public erodes public trust. Advise people to wear face masks today, and many ignore it as a symbol of defiance.

yanks215 β€’ Sep 25, 2020 β€’ View on HN

> Making a claim and then reversing it based on new data is the correct thing to do.Agree with this statement, however it does not apply here. There was no new data. They always knew that masks worked, but they needed them for first responders. Confirmation of this from Fauci interview: https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-mask-advic