As part of Draft Amnesty week. I would do more in-depth research if this creates valuable discussion that warrants further investigation!
I went to EAG in the Bay Area and wore an N95 mask. There were not many of us wearing masks, despite it being near the peak of one of the worst flu seasons in the US in two decades. And we're all used to wearing masks already from COVID. Sure, you're tired of wearing masks, but think of the cost-benefit.
Why did I wear a mask?
I don't want to get sick. I have gotten sick after 4/7 EAGs I have gone to. I am fairly certain from whom I got it in two cases. It sucks! I'm tired of getting sick
The costs of wearing a mask: the cost of the mask + the inconvenience + the lost social benefits from facial expressions.
How can these be overcome? If you want to take it off for a 1:1, you can do that away from the crowd or go walk outside, if the weather allows. If you have to take it off for a talk or for tabling for an event, you can do that! It's not mandatory.
On the other hand:
The cost of getting sick is high! Let’s say you’d get sick for a week on average.
If I value my work week at a simple $1000 for the money I make, not even accounting for the impact, it's about $1 to wear a mask and prevent potentially losing $1000 of income.
For me, getting sick 4/7 times means if wearing a mask reduces my chances of getting sick even by 50%, the EV is that I’ll save $285 for wearing a mask.[1] Not including the costs associated with suffering, caretaking, potential costs of getting someone else sick & continuing a chain of illness, etc.
If other people wear masks, it reduces your need to, if you can't wear a mask. Especially in large crowded spaces, we should be doing this at conferences!
I saw at the end of the EAG, we were giving away boxes of masks. I didn't see those available during the conference. I would love if it were more openly available. This could be my shortcoming in not noticing them.
I encourage you to wear a mask when you can at EAGs. One of our cause areas is pandemic prevention. This is part of that as well. Thank you :)
Thanks to Finan Adamson and Caitlin Walker for quick review
- ^
Expected cost without a mask:
(47)×1000=40007≈571.43(74)×1000=74000≈571.43
Expected cost with a mask:
(414)×1000+1=(27)×1000+1=20007+1≈285.71+1=286.71(144)×1000+1=(72)×1000+1=72000+1≈285.71+1=286.71
Courtesy of AI
$1 cost seems like a big underestimate of the cost to me. Aside from the discomfort being able to see people's lips is useful in a loud environment.
I think nasal sprays are a more cost-effective solution.
I think I buy the premises here that being sick/getting sick is high cost and happens a lot at conferences, but I also think the cost of wearing masks is pretty non-trivial. I wonder if there are some 80/20 approaches to masking that can cover a lot of ground with lower costs. E.g., wearing a mask on transit on the way, as people also get sick/pick up bugs from planes/transit. Similarly, norms of not shaking hands, using air purifiers, or having more walking meetings all seem pretty cheap/easy to implement.
Last I checked, the evidence for efficacy of nasal sprays was iffy (in part due to a paucity of unbiased studies and some questionable methodologies). I'm not opposed to the idea of using selected sprays on a very low risk of harm / uncertain benefit calculus, but -- unless the evidence base is significantly better than I recall -- then I think we should be careful to clarify that this intervention isn't in the same evidentiary ballpark as the one OP recommends.
Sure, $1 is an underestimate. It's just the cost of the mask. Though it's harder to estimate the costs of discomfort / sound / seeing faces. How do we account for that?
IMO Nasal sprays seem like a higher friction option, because you have to actively use it multiple times throughout the day. Masks, you can put on & leave on & people are familiar with it. Maybe it's easier than I imagine & everyone could be spraying their nostrils every hour every day of EAG.
If nasal sprays were cost effective (which I don't think they are), why don't we offer them at conferences and tell people to use them?
Similarly for zinc lozenges. Those are evidence-based at reducing cold duration & preventing cold onset. Why don't we offer these at EAGs?
(Not saying you're the one who is responsible by replying to your comment)
One could at least try to estimate their personal cost of wearing a mask by considering the following:
Suppose my chance of getting sick at EAG was 0%. How much would someone have to pay me to wear a mask?
If we're talking about the entire conference, I think I'd need to be paid at least a few hundred dollars.
How about only during large group gatherings? So talks, workshops, & while getting food.
You can take it off for 1:1s and anything else.
Is it a very different cost?
For me this would be a way lower cost, yes. But it's very contingent on what the workshops are like. Just listening to someone speak and a Q&A? I'd do it for like $10. But if it's speed meetings or anything with significant face to face interaction I'd need to be paid more.
FWIW I can't recall ever having gotten sick after going to a conference. I might get sick less than average though. I agree that you should definitely wear a mask if you have >50% odds of getting sick without one.
Im 0/2
Congrats :)
Thanks for sharing. The estimated benefits seem plausible for the average attendee to me. On the one hand, I suspect most people are at significantly lower risk of significant illness transmission than you believe yourself to be. On the other hand, the value of eliminating one week of an average EAG participant's work-preclusive illness is probably more than $1000. (A conservative estimate of that value would consider the total cost of employing the individual, not just their direct salary -- and that is often at least 2x the employee's salary.) Although the median infection will cause less than a week's incapacitation, productivity-reducing symptoms can last for a while even if the risk of long COVID is estimated as low. You could also count added value from reducing the risk of getting other people sick, not just the reduction in risk to the mask-wearer.
As Larks mentioned, there are some meaningful non-economic costs to consider. There's always the option of selective usage (e.g., yes during a presentation at which you aren't speaking, no during a 1:1) to mitigate some of the non-economic costs. You may have accounted for at least some degree of non-usage when you specified that mask usage "reduces my chances of getting sick even by 50%," though. Your analysis might be more robust at a ~30% reduction to accommodate more periods of non-use.
I suspect the harder questions on a cost-benefit assessment would be between various flavors of "sometimes mask" rather than just no mask or all mask. It would also involve considering alternative mitigation measures such as testing. It sounds like you're more susceptible than most and have a favorable cost/benefit profile; people who have new onset coughing or sneezing are likely to have one as well.
I would say that outside of conferences, I am less likely to get sick than most people I know.
However, EAGs and conferences in general are like the first week of uni or day care. It's a breeding ground for infectious diseases from all over the world!
I think everyone's risk of getting sick at events like this are higher than their normal risks of getting sick & the fact that this is a high risk area should be taken into account.
Intuitively, it's all been very clear (to me, at least!) - but thanks for spending time on making those calculations. An extra argument to convince sceptics is always useful.