I& #39;ve been thinking about the widespread concern that masks will promote a "false sense of security." We& #39;ve learned a few things from #HIV prevention and #harmreduction that I think should make us cautious about this messaging. 1/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/well/live/coronavirus-face-mask-mistakes.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes">https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/0...

This is the old risk compensation argument. Risk compensation is the idea that feeling protected – by masks, in this case – will lead us to take more risks. This concern mostly comes up around sex and drugs. Will #PrEP reduce condom use? Will sterile syringes promote drug use? 2/

But here& #39;s the thing. Concerns about risk compensation are often rooted in morality, not science. When we assume that mask wearers will be reckless disease-spreaders, we perpetuate pandemic shaming and risk eroding trust in public health leaders. 3/ https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/apr/04/pandemic-shaming-is-it-helping-us-keep-our-distance">https://www.theguardian.com/science/2...

Instead, let’s communicate the science about the effectiveness of cloth masks, tenuous as it is, and continue to emphasize the importance of other prevention strategies. Most people will follow public health guidelines. Some may not, and let& #39;s try to reduce harms for them too. 4/

We should embrace effective risk-reduction strategies regardless of concerns about potential behavior change. We need to understand whether cloth masks prevent #coronavirus transmission. But let’s stop asking whether they’ll promote irresponsible behavior. /end