Science. People want to stand on the science to defend their positions. Many, if not most, people support the governments positions to do this or that. These people along with the government and media want to say that it's all scientific. The social distancing, the isolation of the healthy, the face masks, all backed by science. Is it though?
Source
Masks have been looked at for their efficacy in protecting against viral transmission. Most studies, like random control trials (RCTs) conclude there is no significant efficacy. Tge CDC even published a paper in April to conclude that face masks are not effective.
Here, we review the evidence base on the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures and environmental hygiene measures in non-healthcare settings and discuss their potential inclusion in pandemic plans. Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning.”
They reviewed the existing evidence for face mask efficiency, with 10 randomized controlled trials showing no substantial effect, was the conclusion.
Face masks
In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks
Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids (36). There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.
Yup, to make it clear they state their conclusion thus:
Discussion
In this review, we did not find evidence to support a protective effect of personal protective measures or environmental measures in reducing influenza transmission.
We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.
Is this science? Is it not science? When does the science matter? What's the real value of wearing a face masks when you're not sick and asymptomatic people (if they exist) don't even spread the alleged virus? Psychological comfort? Why are people harassing and shaming others for not wanting to wear a mask when not sick that apparently doesn't offer any real protection? Why are people threatening and wishing violence against people who don't want to wear face masks when not sick?
If you want to wear one, ok, have at it. Why has the world gone mad trying to force this onto everyone? The evidence of RCTs that they don't really work as purported is there, but there are no RCTs that they do work are claimed. Fear is ruling the minds of many, that's how I see it. Then comes the need for control and the violence follows trying to enforce that control.
It's so ironic that you started your post saying people like to use science to defend their positions and that's pretty much what you just did in your post.
Don't cut a quote to fit your narrative.
(However, as with hand hygiene, face masks might be able to reduce the transmission of other infections and therefore have value in an influenza pandemic when healthcare resources are stretched.)
Don't even include misinformation
(RCTs) conclude there is no significant efficacy, even for N95 masks.
As the study clearly states they didn't consider respirators.
This demonstrates how people stand on the science they want, yet the science shifts and changes to support different people's conclusions. There are other studies over the past years that demonstrate cloth masks are ineffective. That science and this one from the CDC aren't stood on because it didn't conform to the desired conclusion people want to have accepted. When a paper does support what someone wants, then they stand on that science to advocate their position.
What other infected? Might be able? Ok, it might. How so? If the particles are larger? Sure. Is that the case with coronavirus? What criteria is applied to the "might"? Might isn't scientific position to base something on, is it? I didn't say this study, but other studies, conclude... yet I was wrong about the N95 part as I made a bad recall from memory, as studies do show they make a difference from cloth masks.
From the cited study:
Interesting how you skipped that part out of your quotes.
What Swann failed to point out - the presumed source of your conspiracies here - is that a few weeks later, this was published:
Source
Science is messier than you want to believe. When some new, unheard of situation happens, it takes time and effort to get to an ultimate consensus. Some studies find one answer, others find another. That's why there have been 23,000 papers published on CoViD-19 since its inception until mid-May, a number that continues to double every 20 days from that point.
Stop expecting a single paper to be the final nail in a given coffin. And, read the actual paper properly
I didn't say this study looked at N95, but most studies...conclude... even for N95, but I was wrong in what I said there in recalling the conclusions of other papers as N95 masks do make a difference compared to cloth masks. There are studies looking at cloth, medical and N95 masks, like 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577 concluding 97% of flu particles go through cloth masks.
Science is messy indeed. I was just using 1 paper from the CDC, but there are more like the one above. Evidence against a hypothesis weighs a lot. "Are masks effective" with data showing they aren't is important to demonstrate. Previous publications said how ineffective cloth masks were, or how viruses passed through cloth masks at a high rate and afforded little protection. And that was before the pandemic. Fauci and the Surgeon General were telling people that masks shouldn't be worn in April. Why did that change now? Maybe it's better data like you point out. Thanks for the quote from the May study, I'll look at it and the 21 studies they included in their analysis. Nullified your vote on your comment for a more accurate representation of comment popularity.
I just want to chime in on one point that you make here, that US officials insisted that masks were not effective in reducing infection rates and DID NOT recommend people wear masks from January to April 2020 (approx.). Then suddenly they did a 180 and officials began recommending and in some places mandating the use of face masks.
Trump recently started wearing a mask, when? Was it in July?
After he refused to wear it for 6 months. Now he quasi-supports masks? This is schizophrenic (no offence to people who have schizophrenia). The amount of contradictory information coming from his administration and throughout media is unbelievable.
The level of incompetence is mind numbing.
This is an immense problem and 1 factor why the US is suffering the worst of this pandemic. Something that is rarely mentioned is the MASSIVE failure of the US healthcare system in dealing with this. I think that this is a greater issue than masks, it's the totality of the response that has been a total disaster right from the beginning.
The flip flopping of the US has been quite staggering indeed. Most countries have suffered from this somewhat since its a totally unprecedented situation and nobody was trained for it. The UK for example attempted the herd immunity thing, only to realise it didn't make sense, and their policies on who can go where, when and in what numbers has been extremely messy too, from designing tracing apps to dumping it and just going with Google/Apple, to family bubbles, to no sex with your neighbours and dumping that within a few days! It's pretty wild to watch from a country which has already moved on
Thanks for the counter vote, it functioned for visibility, its purpose already being served since you replied - removed my own vote too, didn't expect others would top it up.
The study you put here states:
And this is the part most people tend to gloss over unfortunately. MORE research seems like a pain and a waste of time to casual readers. So I think I'm talking to myself as much as you that we need to make very clear that one study is not = the answer, in any scenario, and where possible, use meta-analyses rather than individual studies
One thing I like to do to keep my personal views in check is to read carefully the 'discussion' section in publications, probably most have this but not all. This is where they often highlight the flaws and inconsistencies in their methodologies, and sometimes it can be the difference between me having a conclusion or dumping the idea entirely.
Put the full quote in for you, don't want people accusing you of cherry picking...
We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility However, as with hand hygiene, face masks might be able to reduce the transmission of other infections and therefore have value in an influenza pandemic when healthcare resources are stretched.
What are the other infections? Might? Is might a good scientific position to base something on? Might what? What's the criteria that it "might" reduce those transmissions? Size of the particle? Is coronavirus large enough for that to be the case?
Goodness, I didn't write the article. I did read it though. All of it.
I edited the comment before noticing you replied:
Might? Is might a good scientific position to base something on? Might what? What's the criteria that it "might" reduce those transmissions? Size of the particle? Is coronavirus large enough for that to be the case?
Goodness you didn't right it, ok, I didn't suspect you did. They say "might", and that seem to carry a lot of weight in your response.
It wasn't the word might that carried weight with me, it was the fact you omitted that part in your quote. I find for the sake of transparency, if you are going to take a quote from an article that supports your narrative then by not quoting the part which undermines that point, no matter how slightly, is telling in itself.
Yeah, it "might" do something. Why would they say that, without backing it up with any explanation? Is that an agenda of their own?
What about their own conclusion:
Does that matter? Why not talk about that conclusion? "Looking at other studies, the conclusion is there is no significant reduction with masks, but hey, ya never know, it 'might' actually do something anyways..." LOL. Yeah, that holds a lot of weight ;)
:0)
Forcing everyone to wear masks when they don't provide any real protection is all part of the psychological warfare being waged on Americans. The radical politicians and media want to force a nationwide mandate that everyone has to wear a mask. This helps their political agenda to keep citizens, businesses, and schools locked down in the US until after the election in November. They don't care about the lives they are ruining in order to achieve their radical goals.
Yes it's sad the political machinations around this whole thing and the suppression of treatment and forced behavioral control which is a removal of freedoms when you are forced to do something against your will.
The question is not if masks work but if we want them to work. If masks work than it is irresponsible to wear them when you are not around members of a high risk group. The only way to get through this pandemic is to achieve herd immunity while shielding the vulnerable. The longer it takes to achieve herd immunity and then get back to normal, the more people will die because of all the unintended consequences caused by the various unreasonable regulations imposed by the government. (Postponed surgeries, suicides and drug overdoses at home, and poverty, starvation and a lack of healthcare in the developing world.)
I see what you mean, but I still think only people who have symptoms should be considering being responsible to wear a mask to avoid expelling their sickness to some degree. If it was as deadly as the media was claiming, and was demonstrable, then I would try anything to not die, but that's not the case. Herd immunity is desired indeed.
Hello @krnel,
I agree with you that there is no conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of the use of the mask. However, it is a reality in almost the entire world, the imposition of its use. There is such effective indoctrination by propaganda means that it affects the collective unconscious. In such a way, that if you do not use it, you will be condemned by your own neighbors and even denied access to establishments.
No está confirmada la efectividad pero ayuda a evitar el contagio. Es importante su uso
Yes, the problem is the justification that it's all backed by science, when it isn't... and ppl swallow it whole.
We can expect an entire generation of people permanently disabled by prolonged mask usage, or shortened lifespans. Expect increased cases of stress, anxiety, depression, and suicide, at least.
It's going to weaken immune systems and cause breathing issues at the least from the masks, and the lockdown and isolation has all the issues you mention.
They want us dead. This is just more evidence for anyone with eyes and ears to see and hear.
I was thinking a black balaclava. That counts as a "cloth face covering", and doesn't violate any laws. I'll keep it in my bag or pocket, and if somebody confronts me, I'll slip it on and say "better?"
Well it's not good for your health, no matter what people say. You can see many people have breathing issues. It's demonstrable that there is lower oxygen higher CO2 intake.
As a nurse I only ever wore masks or gloves when necessary. They are health risks otherwise. I hate seeing food workers or produce store cashiers wear the same grubby pair of gloves for an entire shift. Yikes. Have they no concept of disease transmission? I'm not a germaphobe, but purposely spreading mass amounts of unknown microbes to the public is wrong. We need an immune system, and it needs practice, but that's not the way.
😁
Oh this is a new way for fashion industry pharma to make money. It's just so obvious. Now it's trendy to have butterflies on your mask instead of a free face.
Yeah, or a picture of your own face printed on it :P
Hahahah, that would be someting. No more plastic surgery.... Maybe that would be actually better lol
First they work then they don’t work lol I’ll just take my chances and live my life the way I always did
Indeed. Wear one if you want or not, don't force it on others.
Here's the answer to your questions: The Masks Speak (I call it conspiracy practice)
Not wearing the mask? Hmmm... you must be a "conspiracy theorist" , whatever that means
yea but you look like you care, right? At least you look like a lemming, and what you look like is all that matters? Me, I'm a people hater non-mask wearer.
New normal indeed. I think forever, repeating each year, unless the information gets out to break spell.
I have done my research, and there is no such thing as a reliable study. I spoke to my Representatives office today and one of my senators and voiced my concerns that an American Tax Paine person has to be forced to take the kind of abuse has and ostracism from local stores because I cannot wear a mask.
Sorry to hear @wandrnrose7. Hope this will be over soon.
Me, too. Hugs.
I get your point and the truth is that it's very unhealthy in the long run. It shouldn't be seen as the new normal. In my country (Nigeria) , the people dont really wear it expect in really crowded places and during hospital visits.
I think hand hygiene and the distancing is enough. At least these two measures have helped decongest usually overcrowded places like stadiums and churches. Also the incidence of other infectious diseases seem to be on the decline because of this hygienic practices so i think these measures have also brought some good around
Ninja. No, should be Chinja.
where the kungflue came from.
lol
People should not get divided in mask-wearer and mask-hater because in the end we are fighting the wrong fight. Now already you hear that bus drivers get hurt or even killed because of asking people to wear a mask in the bus.
Posted using Dapplr
Masks protect you from those with a zombie-like mind. It's not that you have to wear a mask but you can see from far someone else wearing it. Then you see someone without a mask and wish him a great day!