The science of face masks

Like the Dutch government concluded, there is no evidence wearing face masks is effective.

https://www.technocracy.news/masks-are-neither-effective-nor-safe-a-summary-of-the-science/

The policy of mandatory wearing of face masks is faith based, not science.

@metal-brain said
Like the Dutch government concluded, there is no evidence wearing face masks is effective.

https://www.technocracy.news/masks-are-neither-effective-nor-safe-a-summary-of-the-science/

The policy of mandatory wearing of face masks is faith based, not science.

Wrong Forum. This belongs to "Debates"

You start a discussion after reading this publication:
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/36/eabd3083

which should be available to you and Reports on a scietific method to asses the properties of face masks.

You couls also if ou wnt to discuss formulate a hypothesis, then we can go further.

So I began to read through the study, the Sources and the Sources of those.

* One pivotal research was done on Groups of less than 100 People, and found no difference in influenza, but the number of cases (Maybe even Zero?, probably less than 10) was not disclosed in the freely available Abstract https://www.eurekaselect.com/125489/article

* One article actually reported a reduction of transmissiony by 19% (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1.full.pdf) which is an effect at least.

Please Forward your well formulated hypothesis.

I bring a string where you can discuss:

* Face masks do reduce the amount of particles exhaled by the wearer.

* The spread ov COVID-19 is mainly (if not exclusively) by droplets.

* the reduction of droplets will reduce the amount of infectious material in the atmosphere.

* less infectious material in the atmosphere will reduce the Risk of Transmission.

@ponderable said
Wrong Forum. This belongs to "Debates"

You start a discussion after reading this publication:
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/36/eabd3083

which should be available to you and Reports on a scietific method to asses the properties of face masks.

You couls also if ou wnt to discuss formulate a hypothesis, then we can go further.

I read the article. It is inconclusive. That means no evidence.

@ponderable said
So I began to read through the study, the Sources and the Sources of those.

* One pivotal research was done on Groups of less than 100 People, and found no difference in influenza, but the number of cases (Maybe even Zero?, probably less than 10) was not disclosed in the freely available Abstract https://www.eurekaselect.com/125489/article

* One article actually repo ...[text shortened]... he atmosphere.

* less infectious material in the atmosphere will reduce the Risk of Transmission.

Here is an excerpt from that article:

"Wearing facemasks consistently and correctly for long periods may not be easy for many people. There is a need to calculate where the balance of benefits and costs lie in facemask wearing for disease prevention (Baracco et al., 2015; Rivera et al., 1997; McGain et al., 2017; Coulter, 2017)"

In other words, inconclusive because many face masks leak and even the best surgical masks need to be worn properly for them to be effective.

@metal-brain said

https://www.technocracy.news/masks-are-neither-effective-nor-safe-a-summary-of-the-science/

I just read that link and it is just packed full of misinformation and massively cheery-picked links listed at its bottom to help support that misinformation out of all the scientific studies the vast majority of which conclude that waring masks DOES significantly reduce the incidence of spread.

The link says in the second paragraph;
"
My wife and I dined out last night in a very empty restaurant and the young waitress was required to wear a cloth mask. I asked her how she was doing with the mask and if there were any side effects. She related that was consistently short of breath (when away from the table, she lowered the mask below her nose) and that she had actually passed out because of it a few days earlier, taking her straight to the floor."

This is NOT meaningful evidence that wearing masks generally makes people short of breath or endangers their health.
My bother and I, who is relatively healthy (despite me having a rare form of a disease of the blood vessels), and my disabled mother, who as some serious preexisting medial conditions including significant heart and lung damage and a blood disorder, have often wore masks and neither of us have ever had problems with breathing or passing out at a result. That doesn't by itself mean that masks couldn't do that no more than the above claimed incidence of breathlessness, which I suspect is just a propaganda lie and possibly from a Trump supporter, means that masks can do that.

Now, shall we see what the current general consensus is among the experts, you know, the people that actually KNOW what they are talking about, shall we? ;

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent
"...health experts say the evidence is clear that masks can help prevent the spread of COVID-19
..."

and that link then explains just some of the evidence;

"One category of evidence comes from laboratory studies of respiratory droplets and the ability of various masks to block them. An experiment using high-speed video found that hundreds of droplets ranging from 20 to 500 micrometers were generated when saying a simple phrase, but that nearly all these droplets were blocked when the mouth was covered by a damp washcloth. Another study of people who had influenza or the common cold found that wearing a surgical mask significantly reduced the amount of these respiratory viruses emitted in droplets and aerosols.

But the strongest evidence in favor of masks come from studies of real-world scenarios. “The most important thing are the epidemiologic data,” ... Because it would be unethical to assign people to not wear a mask during a pandemic, the epidemiological evidence has come from so-called “experiments of nature.

A recent study published in Health Affairs, for example, compared the COVID-19 growth rate before and after mask mandates in 15 states and the District of Columbia. It found that mask mandates led to a slowdown in daily COVID-19 growth rate, which became more apparent over time. The first five days after a mandate, the daily growth rate slowed by 0.9 percentage-points compared to the five days prior to the mandate; at three weeks, the daily growth rate had slowed by 2 percentage-points.

Another study looked at coronavirus deaths across 198 countries and found that those with cultural norms or government policies favoring mask-wearing had lower death rates.

Two compelling case reports also suggest that masks can prevent transmission in high-risk scenarios, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford. In one case, a man flew from China to Toronto and subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. He had a dry cough and wore a mask on the flight, and all 25 people closest to him on the flight tested negative for COVID-19. In another case, in late May, two hair stylists in Missouri had close contact with 140 clients while sick with COVID-19. Everyone wore a mask and none of the clients tested positive.
”

@metal-brain said

"Wearing facemasks consistently and correctly for long periods may not be easy for many people. There is a need to calculate where the balance of benefits and costs lie in facemask wearing for disease prevention

So, the implied moronic suggestion being made in the above is that the 'cost' of "not be easy for many people", meaning they like Trump just don't like being seen with masks because they think it doesn't make them look good (the other suggestion of causing people to become breathless and pass out is just BS not supported by the evidence thus it is the former, not the latter, that's the real reason), may outweigh the benefit of a few million less deaths from the disease.
Trading millions of human lives for the sake of a bit of frivolous vanity. Yes, that's really a good and morally responsible thing to do.

So, you now not only apparently anti-vax but also anti-mask; Apparently you don't want action to control the pandemic and to deduce the millions of deaths.
Are you also anti-social-distancing and/or anti-quarantine? -just wondering whether you are at least consistent.

@humy said
I just read that link and it is just packed full of misinformation and massively cheery-picked links listed at its bottom to help support that misinformation out of all the scientific studies the vast majority of which conclude that waring masks DOES significantly reduce the incidence of spread.

The link says in the second paragraph;
"
My wife and I dined out last night in ...[text shortened]... 0 clients while sick with COVID-19. Everyone wore a mask and none of the clients tested positive.
”

Here is an excerpt from your link:

"Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization now recommend cloth masks for the general public, but earlier in the pandemic, both organizations recommended just the opposite. These shifting guidelines may have sowed confusion among the public about the utility of masks."

Your source of information gave conflicting advice. They were probably telling the truth the first time.
Who are the health experts? Did they question all health experts? What is a health expert anyway?

This is about the science, not the biased opinions of a few so called health experts. I provided peer reviewed articles from respected science journals. I expect the same from you.

The Dutch government studied the science and said there is no evidence face masks are effective. The science is no different in the USA and UK.

@metal-brain said
Here is an excerpt from your link:

"Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization now recommend cloth masks for the general public, but earlier in the pandemic, both organizations recommended just the opposite. These shifting guidelines may have sowed confusion among the public about the utility of masks."

Your source of information gave conflicting advice.

No, it didn't. That link of mine never advised to NOT were masks and my link of mine gave massive amounts of evidence why we should wear masks.

They were probably telling the truth the first time.

The link isn't wrong the first time or any other time. If by 'they' you mean the "the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization" then their guess was wrong the first time because we have the new evidence just as I just posted that wearing masks does significantly slow down the spread.

Who are the health experts?

Examples of some are in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization and also the ones that found the new evidence I posted.

Did they question all health experts?

What? Question every single health expert in the world? Wow that's a stupid question. And it generally isn't a case of those organizations "questioning" the experts but rather their experts passing on their finding to those organizations; That's because that's what the experts are employed to do.

What is a health expert anyway?

Are you now denying the existence of health experts or are you asking for a definition of 'health expert'?
If the former; Just for starters, what do you thing a doctor is?
If the latter; A health expert is an expert on people's health.

This is about the science, not the biased opinions of a few so called health experts.

Correct; the same science that says wearing masks slows down the spread. We have already shown you some links for this.

The Dutch government studied the science and said there is no evidence face masks are effective.

we have already debunked your link's claim and moved on.

@humy said
No, it didn't. That link of mine never advised to NOT were masks and my link of mine gave massive amounts of evidence why we should wear masks.

They were probably telling the truth the first time.

The link isn't wrong the first time or any other time. If by 'they' you mean the "the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organizatio ...[text shortened]... evidence face masks are effective. [/quote]we have already debunked your link's claim and moved on.

Your link doesn't have any relevant scientific studies to back your claim. I noticed one about a wet washcloth. Do you wear a wet wash cloth on your face? Does anyone?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization originally said face masks are not effective. They have since contradicted themselves. Those are your health experts? Liars?

Fauci and Redfield are known liars. Your experts are admitted liars. Fauci even gave reasons face masks are ineffective. The proof is in the videos. They are here to stay.

YouTube

The Dutch government studied the science and said there is no evidence face masks are effective. Nobody has proven otherwise. The science doesn't change just because it is in another country.

@metal-brain said
Your link doesn't have any relevant scientific studies

right, it just mentions them instead. Your point?

@humy said
right, it just mentions them instead. Your point?

Do you wear a wet wash cloth on your face?

@metal-brain said
Do you wear a wet wash cloth on your face?

No, I ware a mask, something proven to slow down the spread. Your point?

@humy said
No, I ware a mask, something proven to slow down the spread. Your point?

Your link used a study that used a wet washcloth. That is a joke!
If your best evidence is a wet wash cloth which nobody wears on their face you fell for it.
You need to prove a face masks slows down the spread, not a wet washcloth. Even a child could see that. What is wrong with you?

@metal-brain said
Your link used a study that used a wet washcloth.

It mentioned it. So what? What's your point?

If your best evidence is a wet wash cloth ...

It isn't. Your new stupid straw man?
That link mentioned much other more significant evidence nothing to do with wet wash cloth.

You need to prove a face masks slows down the spread

We have already shown you several links that showed the evidence which you don't bother to read and instead just repeat the same BS straw mans. The proof is there for you to see if only you want to see it.
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
"...the science supports using masks, with recent studies suggesting that they could save lives in different ways: research shows that they cut down the chances of both transmitting and catching the coronavirus,
...
A preprint study4 posted in early August found that weekly increases in per-capita mortality were four times lower in places where masks were the norm or recommended by the government, compared with other regions. Researchers looked at 200 countries, including Mongolia, which adopted mask use in January and, as of May, had recorded no deaths related to COVID-19. Another study5 looked at the effects of US state-government mandates for mask use in April and May. Researchers estimated that those reduced the growth of COVID-19 cases by up to 2 percentage points per day...."

I could show you many other such links to the evidence but I guess you aren't interested in evidence or truth.