undefined | Better HN

0 points011000116y ago0 comments

That's a decision for those in government, but personally I see it as a balance of risk vs reward. There is a high risk of infection and relatively little benefit. It is probably better, for society as a whole, to pay the unemployment payments and have long hair for a while.

Shampoo doesn't remove the virus from one's lungs or exhalations. I'm not sure what benefit shampoo would have over, say, gloves. PPE is good but hairstylists aren't usually trained in its proper use.

I would hope dentists' offices reopen before hairstylists. Dentists are presumably more able to properly use PPE and disinfectants.

0 comments

5 comments · 2 top-level

irq116y ago· 3 in thread

” There is a high risk of infection and relatively little benefit. It is probably better, for society as a whole, to pay the unemployment payments and have long hair for a while.”

Citation absolutely required. We’re talking about people’s lives here, and there’s zero evidence for this kind of intervention.

Everyone says they’re “listening to the science” to make these kinds of decisions, but where is it? Why can’t we be letting people get haircuts while wearing masks?

Particularly in a place like San Francisco, where there have been 1,400 cases total and 23 deaths. It’s simply irrational now, and a lot closer to virtue signaling than anything with a scientific basis.

Don’t just downvote: provide affirmative evidence.

the_watcher6y ago

> there’s zero evidence for this kind of intervention.

Citation absolutely required. While there is definitely a ton of uncertainty around what causes spread, the one thing that there seems to be broad agreement on is that sustained time in a shared pocket of air with an infected person is the most likely transmission vector.

irq116y ago

No, that’s not the way it works. If you want to take people’s livelihoods away from them, you have to justify the seizure, not the other way around.

Hypotheses don’t count. Provide actual scientific proof. You’re ruining people’s lives.

1 more reply

dpau6y ago

> Particularly in a place like San Francisco, where there have been 1,400 cases total and 23 deaths. It’s simply irrational now, and a lot closer to virtue signaling than anything with a scientific basis.

I live in a state with a very low number of cases and deaths, much less than SF. We began the process of reopening today. Which would be fine if our borders were sealed, if quarantine for travelers was enforced, if our systems for contact tracing and testing were adequate. However, none of these requirements have been met. It is only a matter of time before this state, which relies heavily on tourism, sees a rebound of cases and we are once back in the situation we were in a month ago.

randycupertino6y ago

> PPE is good but hairstylists aren't usually trained in its proper use.

Higher end salons use PPE for keratin treatments and offer them to their clients due to the straightening chemicals (allegedly not formaldehyde but many products still contain).

Also, nail salon techs had been starting to wear masks and even face shields due to powder coating and dust from dremeling gel coating and acrylics.

I don't think there would be a high barrier to entry to transition wider PPE rollout across the field, because it's already implemented among some of the treatments.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse