To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Scotty #

Scotty # wrote: »

Can you show me any evidence from any study that has shown that the public use of masks has done anything to stem the spread of a disease?

Sconsey wrote: »

I can show you evidence of your own nonsense....

That would be a no then?

I don't consider 1 reduction per week per 20,000 masks to be considered 'stemming' the spread.

eleventh

No mask here anyway
https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/queen-elizabeth-sparks-questions-about-why-she-is-not-wearing-a-mask-on-outing/ar-BB1a3YJs

Sconsey

Scotty # wrote: »

That would be a no then?

I don't consider 1 reduction per week per 20,000 masks to be considered 'stemming' the spread.

No comment on all your crap I called you on then?

odyssey06

Scotty # wrote: »

That would be a no then?
I don't consider 1 reduction per week per 20,000 masks to be considered 'stemming' the spread.

The figures you are quoting are not static e.g. it was
1 reduction per week per 20,000 when there are 1000 cases per week.

I've heard the Norwegian figure quoted a lot, I've never heard anyone quote their qualifications on their figures.

There's lots of questions to consider about the report.
Did the report consider aerosol transmission in coming up with its findings? That would significantly alter their figures.

The report found that:
distances of 1 metre or more reduce the risk of infection by an estimated 80 per cent.
Face masks used in the population only reduce the risk by approximately 40 per cent.

It would be helpful to know what the figures were for 1 metre distance AND masks.

Why are the Norwegians now recommending that they be worn on public transport at busy times?
"the effect of face masks increases with increased spread of infection."

Their actions speak louder than their words, but their words still back the role of masks in stemming the tide.

brianhere

I think this is a reasonable summary of the scientific literature on this subject, by Dr Jim Meehan:

“I'm a surgeon that has performed over 10,000 surgical procedures wearing a surgical mask. However, that fact alone doesn't really qualify me as an expert on the matter. More importantly, I am a former editor of a medical journal. I know how to read the medical literature, distinguish good science from bad, and fact from fiction. Believe me, the medical literature is filled with bad fiction masquerading as medical science. It is very easy to be deceived by bad science.
Since the beginning of the pandemic I've read hundreds of studies on the science of medical masks. Based on extensive review and analysis, there is no question in my mind that healthy people should not be wearing surgical or cloth masks. Nor should we be recommending universal masking of all members of the population. That recommendation is not supported by the highest level scientific evidence.

First, let's be clear. The premise that surgeon's wearing masks serves as evidence that "masks must work to prevent viral transmission" is a logical fallacy that I would classify as an argument of false equivalence, or comparing "apples to oranges."
Although surgeons do wear masks to prevent their respiratory droplets from contaminating the surgical field and the exposed internal tissues of our surgical patients, that is about as far as the analogy extends. Obviously, surgeons cannot "socially distance" from their surgical patients (unless we use robotic surgical devices, in which case, I would definitely not wear a mask).
Surgical and cloth masks do nothing to prevent viral transmission. We should all realize by now that face masks have never been shown to prevent or protect against viral transmission. Which is exactly why they have never been recommended for use during the seasonal flu outbreak, epidemics, or previous pandemics.

The failure of the scientific literature to support medical masks for influenza and all other viruses, is also why Fauci, the US Surgeon General, the CDC, WHO, and pretty much every infectious disease expert on the planet stated that wearing masks won't prevent transmission of SARS CoV-2. Although the public health "authorities" flipped, flopped, and later changed their recommendations, the science did not change, nor did new science appear that supported the wearing of masks in public. In fact, the most recent systemic analysis once again confirms that masks are ineffective in preventing the transmission of viruses like CoVID-19.
If a surgeon were sick, especially with a viral infection, they would not perform surgery as they know the virus would NOT be stopped by their surgical mask.

Another area of "false equivalence" has to do with the environment in which the masks are worn. The environments in which surgeon's wear masks minimize the adverse effects surgical masks on their wearers.
Unlike the public wearing masks in the community, surgeon's work in sterile surgical suites equipped with heavy duty air exchange systems that maintain positive pressures, exchange and filter the room air at a very high level, and increase the oxygen content of the room air. These conditions limit the negative effects of masks on the surgeon and operating room staff. And yet despite these extreme climate control conditions, clinically studies demonstrate the negative effects (lowering arterial oxygen and carbon dioxide re-breathing) of surgical masks on surgeon physiology and performance.
Surgeon's and operating room personnel are well trained, experienced, and meticulous about maintaining sterility. We only wear fresh sterile masks. We don the mask in a sterile fashion. We wear the mask for short periods of time and change it out at the first signs of the excessive moisture build up that we know degrades mask effectiveness and increases their negative effects.
Surgeon's NEVER re-use surgical masks, nor do we ever wear cloth masks.”
Jim Meehan, MD
7/22/2020

xhomelezz

Is it the same guy right?

https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/jim-meehan-anti-vaccine-rant-examining-claims/

http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2018/03/1989-jim-meehan_31.html?m=1

railer201

^^^^^
So this surgeon is right and the WHO, CDC, ECDC, NHS, HSE and numerous other health organisations are wrong. It sounds a bit like our wee Johnnie in the St Patrick's Day parade who was marching out of step, but his Mum said 'No' - it's everyone else that is out step'.

The debate on masks is over, it ended when the WHO came on board and even now supply DIY advice on making cloth masks.

eleventh

Great post overall.

This in particular I'm quoting because it is so important that people read and be aware of - especially if you or the people you love have to wear a mask in work (and threatened with being fired from the job if you don't).

It is really bad for health over time. It's very sad to see what's happening before our eyes, where people have no choice but to work a job like that, a job that would be difficult enough even without a mask, but now a mask on top of it that has to be worn for the day.

Imagine doing hard physical labour and having to wear a mask that would affect your physical strength and ability to do your job, but you have to keep doing it... It is absolutely disgusting what people are allowing to happen to others in our society-- those who work the very hardest to keep the building and infrastructure of society going that we all take for granted and most never think about.

brianhere wrote: »

....

Another area of "false equivalence" has to do with the environment in which the masks are worn. The environments in which surgeon's wear masks minimize the adverse effects surgical masks on their wearers.
Unlike the public wearing masks in the community, surgeon's work in sterile surgical suites equipped with heavy duty air exchange systems that maintain positive pressures, exchange and filter the room air at a very high level, and increase the oxygen content of the room air. These conditions limit the negative effects of masks on the surgeon and operating room staff. And yet despite these extreme climate control conditions, clinically studies demonstrate the negative effects (lowering arterial oxygen and carbon dioxide re-breathing) of surgical masks on surgeon physiology and performance.
Surgeon's and operating room personnel are well trained, experienced, and meticulous about maintaining sterility. We only wear fresh sterile masks. We don the mask in a sterile fashion. We wear the mask for short periods of time and change it out at the first signs of the excessive moisture build up that we know degrades mask effectiveness and increases their negative effects.
Surgeon's NEVER re-use surgical masks, nor do we ever wear cloth masks.”

xhomelezz

The part you highlighted is nonsense, hope you know that and you just try to wind up few posters

brianhere

Yes and if anybody is interested in looking at the medical literature that he is talking about, and which completely rules out the use of masks to stop the spread of a virus, you can see some of it here: https://jamesfetzer.org/2020/08/studies-of-surgical-masks-efficacy-masks-are-useless-in-preventing-the-spread-of-disease/ .

xhomelezz

brianhere wrote: »

Yes and if anybody is interested in looking at the medical literature that he is talking about, and which completely rules out the use of masks to stop the spread of a virus, you can see some of it here: https://jamesfetzer.org/2020/08/studies-of-surgical-masks-efficacy-masks-are-useless-in-preventing-the-spread-of-disease/ .

Thank you but nope. Even worse than the first one.

odyssey06

brianhere wrote: »

Yes and if anybody is interested in looking at the medical literature that he is talking about, and which completely rules out the use of masks to stop the spread of a virus, you can see some of it here: https://jamesfetzer.org/2020/08/studies-of-surgical-masks-efficacy-masks-are-useless-in-preventing-the-spread-of-disease/ .

In one of your earlier posts your talked about false equivalence...
The article you linked to are studies of the use of face masks by surgeons & post operative wound infections.

There is absolutely zero relevance to the current virus and current debate.
So absent is the lack of relevance, it would be reasonable to conclude it is an attempt at deliberate disinformation.

Throughout this and your earlier link your 'experts' are referring to irrelevent studies - there either relate to specific use by surgeons OR as PPE. But you are not mandated to wear masks here as PPE. You are mandated to wear masks as a barrier to limit the droplets produced by an infected person. So in some respects they are not wrong but nor are they right either.

Loafing Oaf

brianhere wrote: »

Yes and if anybody is interested in looking at the medical literature that he is talking about, and which completely rules out the use of masks to stop the spread of a virus, you can see some of it here: https://jamesfetzer.org/2020/08/studies-of-surgical-masks-efficacy-masks-are-useless-in-preventing-the-spread-of-disease/ .

Author of ‘Nobody Died at Sandy Hook,’ a 450-page book that claims the horrific massacre of 20 children never happened

odyssey06

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Author of ‘Nobody Died at Sandy Hook,’ a 450-page book that claims the horrific massacre of 20 children never happened

Nobody has died from covid either... stick to the script you dolt!

Some people can't handle too much reality. That this is a world out of control, spontaneously throwing up diseases and disasters that no one planned, that no one can stop, just steer the best course they can through the storm in ships of variable seaworthines....
Simpler to explain the world when you can reduce it to something that can be controlled, like a bad guy conspiracy.

seefin

hotmail.com wrote: »

The relaxed attitude on masks started back in March with the government.

Most people wearing them to shops because they have to, rather than out of any desire to wear them.

Has anyone caught the virus from a supermarket?

Nobody knows where the cases of community transmission came from so could be retail?

pjohnson

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Author of ‘Nobody Died at Sandy Hook,’ a 450-page book that claims the horrific massacre of 20 children never happened

I'd imagine his fans lap that up aswell.


Even by the standard of "sources" that is provided that is an absolutely shocking one to have available let alone use.

Scotty #

railer201 wrote: »

The debate on masks is over, it ended when the WHO came on board...

Shouldn't people be getting 'on board' with the WHO though rather than the other way round?

The WHO, CDC, NPHET all advised that masks were not effective at least up until the end of May. What changed?

Now they're advising against face shields. Wouldn't surprise me if they're advising against the general public wearing masks before long.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-mask. I just think people don't use them correctly and that renders them useless.

odyssey06

Scotty # wrote: »

Shouldn't people be getting 'on board' with the WHO though rather than the other way round?

The WHO, CDC, NPHET all advised that masks were not effective at least up until the end of May. What changed?

Now they're advising against face shields. Wouldn't surprise me if they're advising against the general public wearing masks before long.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-mask. I just think people don't use them correctly and that renders them useless.

They were advising against masks as PPE by the general public.
Nothing has changed there - don't rely on masks in public as PPE for you.

What changed was:
(a) more masks
(b) what happened in countries like Czech Rep which mandated masks early,
(c) studies showing e.g. infected hairdressers and plane passangers wearing masks who did not trigger any further infections
(d) a shift in thinking of masks as PPE to protect the uninfected versus masks as barriers to contain the droplets of an infected person.

It is not possible for anyone to use masks correctly according to your definition of what constitutes 'proper use'.
Your theory is that if there are virus particles on the outside of the mask that exhaling will trigger aerosol dispersal of those particles.
This is a theory which appears to have no foundation in any study and is contradicted by real world examples e.g. it would mean medical staff wearing surgical masks, should virus particles be exhaled by a patient, would land on the mask and then be aerosol dispersed. There is zero evidence of this.

railer201

Scotty # wrote: »

Shouldn't people be getting 'on board' with the WHO though rather than the other way round?

The WHO, CDC, NPHET all advised that masks were not effective at least up until the end of May. What changed?

Now they're advising against face shields. Wouldn't surprise me if they're advising against the general public wearing masks before long.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-mask. I just think people don't use them correctly and that renders them useless.

The CDC were advising cloth face coverings at least six months ago plus DIY instructions on making them. As I recall, about three months back, WHO followed suit. The HSE apparently took their lead from the WHO and also advised wearing face coverings, along with similar DIY instructions.

The way I see it, face coverings were field tested in such scenarios as Slovakia, Czechia and elsewhere and deemed to be effective and a positive consensus emerged.

So people are getting on board with the WHO, CDC, HSE now that they're singing off the same hymn sheet. They're not recommending face shields anywhere AFAIK, they never did.

Masks are not a perfect solution, but in the absence of a vaccine, is it not just plain common sense to try to block a killer virus from infecting others and yourself ?

WhiteMan32

While I am not anti-mask, I find it harder to see my footing whilst walking, whenever I am wearing a face mask properly i.e. over my mouth & nose. The mask practically blocks the view right down to my lower half. That may not be a problem at the moment..... but if and when ice, snow, sleet & slush arrives this winter, I fear a greater number of mask-wearing folk will suffer a fall because of this.

Jim_Hodge

WhiteMan32 wrote: »

While I am not anti-mask, I find it harder to see my footing whilst walking, whenever I am wearing a face mask properly i.e. over my mouth & nose. The mask practically blocks the view right down to my lower half. That may not be a problem at the moment..... but if and when ice, snow, sleet & slush arrives this winter, I fear a greater number of mask-wearing folk will suffer a fall because of this.

I've heard others say their vision was obstructed but I can't figure how the mask is affecting peripheral vision at all. Is it a particular type of mask.

weldoninhio

odyssey06 wrote: »

They were advising against masks as PPE by the general public.
Nothing has changed there - don't rely on masks in public as PPE for you.

What changed was:
(a) more masks
(b) what happened in countries like Czech Rep which mandated masks early,
(c) studies showing e.g. infected hairdressers and plane passangers wearing masks who did not trigger any further infections
(d) a shift in thinking of masks as PPE to protect the uninfected versus masks as barriers to contain the droplets of an infected person.

It is not possible for anyone to use masks correctly according to your definition of what constitutes 'proper use'.
Your theory is that if there are virus particles on the outside of the mask that exhaling will trigger aerosol dispersal of those particles.
This is a theory which appears to have no foundation in any study and is contradicted by real world examples e.g. it would mean medical staff wearing surgical masks, should virus particles be exhaled by a patient, would land on the mask and then be aerosol dispersed. There is zero evidence of this.

So with (b) we should see cases plummet in Czechia. They know how to wear masks so it should be like a Cliff.

Graham

weldoninhio wrote: »

So with (b) we should see cases plummet in Czechia. They know how to wear masks so it should be like a Cliff.

unless the virus continues to spread in people homes of course

you forgot that again

CalamariFritti

Graham wrote: »

unless the virus continues to spread in people homes of course

you forgot that again

If cases go down its to the credits of masks. If cases dont go down its because there are still places where no masks are being worn. So basically masks cannot be disproven. Masks are always right regardless what happens. Is that it?

Graham

CalamariFritti wrote: »

If cases go down its to the credits of masks. If cases dont go down its because there are still places where no masks are being worn. So basically masks cannot be disproven. Masks are always right regardless what happens. Is that it?

I don't know where you got that from CF.

Masks are one part of getting this under control.

Yyhhuuu

It amazes me how many think just because you wear a mask no requirement to socially distance. Many retailers still using those plastic visors despite government advice to compliment them with a mask. The hand sanitation is overly hyped as I understand transmission from fomite is minimal.

Concentration should be given to increase ventilation in congested indoor environments to reduce aerosol airborne transmission which is a serious worry. Shopping centre and shop doors and windows kept shut is non sensical

Where are the Marshall's in shopping centres etc to ensure compliance.

Why the hell are hand dryers still allowed. They increase aerosol transmission.

lurker2000

My husband has tested positive earlier this week, he got it in work. I'm waiting for my results but I am now presenting with symptoms so as sure as eggs are eggs, I have it. The aches, pains etc are nothing compared to the worry that I could have inadvertently passed it on to someone vulnerable. But as I've been wearing a mask since March when out and about and keeping a social distance when possible, I have def limited the contact list I could have been giving. That said, I had my elderly mother in my car last week and a friend gave me a drink and i handed the cup back etc so I can't relax until I know they are all clear. If you have any consideration for others, please heed this warning and keep your distance from others.

Dubl07

lurker2000 wrote: »

My husband has tested positive earlier this week, he got it in work. I'm waiting for my results but I am now presenting with symptoms so as sure as eggs are eggs, I have it. The aches, pains etc are nothing compared to the worry that I could have inadvertently passed it on to someone vulnerable. But as I've been wearing a mask since March when out and about and keeping a social distance when possible, I have def limited the contact list I could have been giving. That said, I had my elderly mother in my car last week and a friend gave me a drink and i handed the cup back etc so I can't relax until I know they are all clear. If you have any consideration for others, please heed this warning and keep your distance from others.

That's very tough for you. None of us can totally isolate ourselves, especially if living with anther person. Masking in the car with someone who's not from your household is incredibly difficult to impress upon older people. Twitching at the mask, hanging it from their ear or wrist equally difficult.
I'm considering making "moustache masks" with a gap at the mouth for a straw or spoon. Wig-tape to secure, a flap to lift for a fork-full. This isn't 1918 and the "Spanish" flu. We have velcro, magnetic snaps and other helpful items.
Future generations will doubtlessly snigger.

_Kaiser_

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

I've heard others say their vision was obstructed but I can't figure how the mask is affecting peripheral vision at all. Is it a particular type of mask.

I have that issue. One of the plain black masks - nothing special

I also can't properly breathe in the thing and find it extremely uncomfortable

It's why I switched to the visors. It's no less effective than masks considering most aren't wearing the latter properly anyway and I'm not overly concerned about risk - I live alone, WFH 5 days a week and pretty much only do the shopping once/twice a week (which are not known outbreak centres - even long before masks were mandated) - plus shop staff are wearing them months now and no issues.

It's just more hysteria being driven by threads like this and social media that has now deemed masks vital when funnily enough we had no issues for months in the early-mid summer without them (even allowing for case lag etc)

I fail to see how they can now outlaw visors when a lot of people legitimately can't wear masks - not even counting myself in that. But then our extremely weak Government is being led by public opinion and media overload than actual facts at this stage so it won't surprise me if they try it.

Graham

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I switched to the visors. It's no less effective than masks considering most aren't wearing the latter properly

That's a lot of inaccuracies for such a very small sentence.

Visors are less effective.
Most people are wearing masks correctly.