Face masks not necessary based on current evidence - Holland's Top Scientists conclude after review of evidence

[Logosone]

19 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

But the one thing you CAN always control yourself is wearing a proper mask. That way, when you're distant from others, you're double protected.

No you're not actually. The fact that masks do not protect you from the virus is very clear. The only rationale for masks that was even remotely possible was that you should wear it to protect others because you may be an asymptomatic carrier. Turns out however that asymptomatic transmissions account for 0 to 2.2 per cent, so almost non-existent, as four separate studies have shown.

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.10.20097543v2.full.pdf

 

In other words, not only is a mask useless to protect you, the mask is fundamentally useless because asymptomatic transmission is so rare as to be negligible.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

The bottom line here is:

 

This thread is another is a series of CV related ones by virus denyers, skeptics, conspiracy theory promoting members etc who usually seem to take the same approach:

 

They create their own thread that generates a big and permanent ThaiVisa thread headline. The information contained in their post is often misrepresented, wrong, or taking some small acorn and trying to turn it into an oak tree.

 

The ensuing discussion in the thread generally ends up pointing out how the OP was wrong, or misrepresenting or exaggerating. But they don't mind, because they got their ThaiVisa thread headline, and have done their part to convince the world of their fringe or fake science, unproven cures, etc etc.

 

I'm sure the world's infectious disease and public health experts are waiting with baited breath on what the next pronouncement will be out of some group of scientists in the Netherlands.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Logosone]

50 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Why do these same top scientists from the Netherlands make it mandatory to wear face masks on public transport? They must believe face masks work or they would not enforce this rule right?

The question is not whether masks "work". Some masks do stop particles, though not all masks. That's not the point.

 

The question is whether there is any evidence that masks stop the transmission of the virus. There is, even the WHO in its latest advisory of June 2020 conceded, no direct evidence of any study that shows masks stop transmission of the virus.

 

However, just in case masks might work, despite the clear lack of evidence therefor, dutch scientists are erring on the side of caution and saying that if you are on public transport, where you can not social distance, it's okay to wear a mask as it does no harm, and despite any direct evidence that it stops transmission of the virus, just in case, do wear a mask because there is an elevated risk on close proximity public transport. That does not mean that masks work, or there is direct evidence that masks work. It is just giving masks the benefit of the doubt. That's all.

Edited August 3, 2020 by Logosone

[Logosone]

17 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The bottom line here is:

 

This thread is another is a series of CV related ones by virus denyers, skeptics, conspiracy theory promoting members etc who usually seem to take the same approach:

 

They create their own thread that generates a big and permanent ThaiVisa thread headline. The information contained in their post is often misrepresented, wrong, or taking some small acorn and trying to turn it into an oak tree.

 

The ensuing discussion in the thread generally ends up pointing out how the OP was wrong, or misrepresenting or exaggerating. But they don't mind, because they got their ThaiVisa thread headline, and have done their part to convince the world of their fringe or fake science, unproven cures, etc etc.

 

No, TGJiB, you are the fringe and you are relying on "unproven cures".

 

The mask is an "unproven cure". It does not stop transmission of the virus. There is no evidence that it does, as the top scientists of the Netherlands, after several reviews, have made clear.

 

And yes, I absolutely deny that there is direct evidence that shows that masks stop the transmission of the virus, the WHO says exactly the same, see below. Please do point to the "conspiracy" theory you refer to, lol.

 

WHO June 2020 advisory:

 

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Logosone

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The question is whether there is any evidence that masks stop the transmission of the virus. There is, even the WHO in its latest advisory of June 2020 conceded, no direct evidence of any study that shows masks stop transmission of the virus.

Plenty of evidence, a WHO commissioned study here, many others also:

 

"For the general public, evidence shows that physical distancing of more than 1 m is highly effective and that face masks are associated with protection, even in non-health-care settings, with either disposable surgical masks or reusable 12–16-layer cotton ones"

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The question is not whether masks "work". Some masks do stop particles, though not all masks. That's not the point.

 

The question is whether there is any evidence that masks stop the transmission of the virus. There is, even the WHO in its latest advisory of June 2020 conceded, no direct evidence of any study that shows masks stop transmission of the virus.

 

However, just in case masks might work, despite the clear lack of evidence therefor, dutch scientists are erring on the side of caution and saying that if you are on public transport, where you can not social distance, it's okay to wear a mask as it does no harm, and despite any direct evidence that it stops transmission of the virus, just in case, do wear a mask because there is an elevated risk on close proximity public transport. That does not mean that masks work, or there is direct evidence that masks work. It is just giving masks the benefit of the doubt. That's all.

Actually again your saying totally the opposite of what the scientist say. 

 

They said social distancing is the best thing, if not then use masks. 

 

They never said mask did not work they said they could not prove it worked good. They have proof mask work its just not strong evidence and its not 100%. So they don't want to create a false sense of security.  (i disagree with them).

 

 

[robblok]

14 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The bottom line here is:

 

This thread is another is a series of CV related ones by virus denyers, skeptics, conspiracy theory promoting members etc who usually seem to take the same approach:

 

They create their own thread that generates a big and permanent ThaiVisa thread headline. The information contained in their post is often misrepresented, wrong, or taking some small acorn and trying to turn it into an oak tree.

 

The ensuing discussion in the thread generally ends up pointing out how the OP was wrong, or misrepresenting or exaggerating. But they don't mind, because they got their ThaiVisa thread headline, and have done their part to convince the world of their fringe or fake science, unproven cures, etc etc.

 

I'm sure the world's infectious disease and public health experts are waiting with baited breath on what the next pronouncement will be out of some group of scientists in the Netherlands.

 

 

Yes your right and it is scary how many of those virus deniers, skeptics and conspiracy theory people there are. Also a lot of people want to deny all of this because they hate the restrictions that are in place. They are frustrated (arent we all) and want to go back to before.

[Logosone]

54 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

What you describe as the reason for saying masks weren't needed was pretty much the case everywhere. Just that some changed their mind after stocking up on supplies for medical workers, and others continue to push no need for mask agenda.

 

In reality, outside is small chance of getting infected unless coughed into your face by infected person, when keeping the distance. The wind disperses the droplets to so small concentrations that you could only be infected in theory. Sunlight and higher temperatures in the summer kill it off in the air and on any surfaces it lands on in relatively short time.

 

But let's wait for the fall and winter, when people start staying indoors, in places with little or no ventilation. Where droplets stay basically static in the air for hours and get inhaled by anyone passing by. That will change the results very quickly.

 

About whether masks work or not, I'd like Logosone's explanation about the video below:

 

 

Indeed, there is not just a "small" chance of getting infected, the chance is minute, miniscule, tiny. We have many different studies that show that asymptomatic transmission is in the range of 0 to 2.2 %, so absolutely tiny chance of that happening. You'd have to be next to an asymptomatic  that happens to sneeze or cough in your direction, the chance of that happening, as the studies below show is 0 to 2.2%.

 

Now, the question is not if some masks work. Some masks do stop certain particles. It is a much more fundamental issue, namely that those people who are infected generally have symptoms and you can see them and avoid them. Asymptomatic transmission accounts only for 0 to 2.2 % of tansmissions. So it is perfectly irrelevant how well masks work, since you're extremely unlikely to walk into an asymptomatic person who happens to cough into your face. It is fantastically unlikely. Something that "Uncle Bob" above unfortunately does not take into account.

 

That is most likely the reason why studies show there is no evidence that masks reduce transmission of the virus. Because transmission from asymptomatic carriers is incredibly rare to begin with.

 

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.10.20097543v2.full.pdf

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Logosone

[Bkk Brian]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Indeed, there is not just a "small" chance of getting infected, the chance is minute, miniscule, tiny. We have many different studies that show that asymptomatic transmission is in the range of 0 to 2.2 %, so absolutely tiny chance of that happening. You'd have to be next to an asymptomatic  that happens to sneeze or cough in your direction, the chance of that happening, as the studies below show is 0 to 2.2%.

 

Now, the question is not if some masks work. Some masks to stop certain particles. It is a much more fundamental issue, namely that those people who are infected generally have symptoms and you can see them and avoid them. Asymptomatic transmission accounts only for 0 to 2.2 % of tansmissions. So it is perfectly irrelevant how well masks work, since you're extremely unlikely to walk into an asymptomatic person who happens to cough into your face. It is fantastically unlikely. Something that "Uncle Bob" above unfortunately does not take into account.

 

That is most likely the reason why studies show there is no evidence that masks reduce transmission of the virus. Because transmission from asymptomatic carriers is incredibly rare to begin with.

 

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.10.20097543v2.full.pdf

 

 

You do know that the presymptomatic stage is very contagious and they also do not show symptoms

[Logosone]

12 minutes ago, robblok said:

Actually again your saying totally the opposite of what the scientist say. 

 

They never said mask did not work they said they could not prove it worked good. They have proof mask work its just not strong evidence and its not 100%. 

 

 

Actually, you robblok are saying the total opposite of what the scientists say:

 

'Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,' said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. 'There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.'

 

Hoebe, head of infectious disease control in Zuid-Limburg, the region hit hardest when the pandemic struck Holland, pointed to a Norwegian study showing 200,000 people must wear surgical masks for one week to stop a single Covid-19 case.

 

The nation's top scientists, having examined key data and research, have declared there is no firm evidence to back the use of face coverings. Indeed, they argue that wearing the wretched things may actually hamper the fight against disease.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8583925/The-land-no-face-masks-Hollands-scientists-say-theres-no-solid-evidence-coverings-work.html

 

[Logosone]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You do know that the presymptomatic stage is very contagious and they also do not show symptoms

I do know that asymptomatic transmission has been found in four studies to be in the 0 to 2.2% range:

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.10.20097543v2.full.pdf

[bert bloggs]

2 hours ago, clos88 said:

hey just curious will you get a vaccine too?

might have to to fly to the UK next year

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

15 hours ago, robblok said:

Yes your right and it is scary how many of those virus deniers, skeptics and conspiracy theory people there are. Also a lot of people want to deny all of this because they hate the restrictions that are in place. They are frustrated (arent we all) and want to go back to before.

 

I can't speak to the language translation issue you've raised with the OP... since I don't speak or read Dutch.

 

But I do know, in this thread, the OP has repeatedly mischaracterized the WHO's current guidance on mask wear, and continues to misrepresent what his favorite and often posted chart really represents... In addition to having a history of similarly misleading/misrepresenting CV threads here on TVF -- all sounding very scientific on the surface.

 

So, given all of the above, I tend to take the veracity of his OP post with a HUGE grain of salt.

 

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Actually, you robblok are saying the total opposite of what the scientists say:

 

'Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,' said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. 'There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.'

 

Hoebe, head of infectious disease control in Zuid-Limburg, the region hit hardest when the pandemic struck Holland, pointed to a Norwegian study showing 200,000 people must wear surgical masks for one week to stop a single Covid-19 case.

 

The nation's top scientists, having examined key data and research, have declared there is no firm evidence to back the use of face coverings. Indeed, they argue that wearing the wretched things may actually hamper the fight against disease.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8583925/The-land-no-face-masks-Hollands-scientists-say-theres-no-solid-evidence-coverings-work.html

 

Again that goes against the link in English you yourself put here. Masks are mandatory in public transport because you can't social distance. Its on the link of the RIVM you posted.

 

So could you please stop using a tabloid magazine that hacks stuff and takes it out of context. PM me a Dutch source (would certainly bolster your claim of being able to read Dutch)

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

15 hours ago, robblok said:

Masks are mandatory in public transport because you can't social distance. Its on the link of the RIVM you posted.

 

Plus I posted the actual text and link of the NL government mask requirement for public transport earlier in this thread.

 

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1175911-face-masks-not-necessary-based-on-current-evidence-hollands-top-scientists-conclude-after-review-of-evidence/?do=findComment&comment=15679127

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

I do know that asymptomatic transmission has been found in four studies to be in the 0 to 2.2% range:

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.10.20097543v2.full.pdf

You're ignoring what I said about presymptomatic, as you've ignored the WHO commissioned study on face masks I posted.

 

The fact is that one person started this worldwide pandemic that has led to over 18 million cases and 700 thousand deaths so far. Its far from over, not even peaked yet, these figures will easily double. No matter how small the percentage of asymptomatic transmission there is stopping just one case is enough to stop a country getting infected again.

 

You're not able to see that because of your hate for a simple tool to help protect, face masks. 

 

Like I said before, there are two fronts to this pandemic, the first is the virus and the second is the stupidity of the minority peddling out line figures, studies and reports.

[Logosone]

30 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Plenty of evidence, a WHO commissioned study here, many others also:

 

"For the general public, evidence shows that physical distancing of more than 1 m is highly effective and that face masks are associated with protection, even in non-health-care settings, with either disposable surgical masks or reusable 12–16-layer cotton ones"

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

From your study:  Other meta-analyses have focused on interventions in the health-care setting and have not included non-health-care (eg, community) settings. Our search did not retrieve any systematic review of information on physical distancing, face masks, or eye protection to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV.

 

Interestingly you deliberately left out the last part of the quote: although much of this evidence was on mask use within households and among contacts of cases.  

 

In other words the evidence they had looked at transmissions within households and not in the typical public setting in a supermarket or shopping mall.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

[ianezy0]

Are you really not  noticing world opinion changing on the wearing of masks. Your ignorance is astounding. Message again in 3 months when mandatory wearing of masks will be required in most countries.

 

Watch this space.....

Actually I said this in reply to another of your posts a month or so ago. A lot of decision reversals by so called experts since then Wake up and stop sprouting total BS.

[JensenZ]

41 minutes ago, robblok said:

That is not what you wrote.

 

Plus there is a need to wear masks if you can't social distance. Its mandatory in public transport. So if masks don't work why would they say this. 

Exactly what I thought when I read that paragraph:

 

The one exception outside of the medical frontline has been on public transport, where masks are mandatory on the basis it is difficult to stay apart on crowded buses, ferries and trains. 'We have seen this approach works,' said Christian Hoebe, a professor of infectious diseases in Maastricht and member of the advisory team. 'Face masks should not be seen as a magic bullet that halts the spread. 

 

In a way the whole article is contradictory. What they are basically saying is that masks ARE useful if you cannot practice social distancing, and from looking at the photo of the cafe and streets of Amsterdam in the article, they are not practicing social distancing at all and seem like they are not the slightest bit concerned about it.

 

As the 2nd wave hits many countries around the world, The Netherlands can be seen as an experiment as to the effectiveness of face masks. Watch this space. We can thank the Dutch for risking their citizen's lives to conduct this experiment.

[Logosone]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You're ignoring what I said about presymptomatic, as you've ignored the WHO commissioned study on face masks I posted.

 

The fact is that one person started this worldwide pandemic that has led to over 18 million cases and 700 thousand deaths so far. Its far from over, not even peaked yet, these figures will easily double. No matter how small the percentage of asymptomatic transmission there is stopping just one case is enough to stop a country getting infected again.

 

You're not able to see that because of your hate for a simple tool to help protect, face masks. 

 

Like I said before, there are two fronts to this pandemic, the first is the virus and the second is the stupidity of the minority peddling out line figures, studies and reports.

I have actually above referred to the study you posted.

 

Stopping one case would have been enough at the very start of the pandemic, stopping one case is useless now that the virus has pervaded the whole world.

 

Of course I don't hate a face nappy, a piece of cloth. I'm merely looking at the evidence accurately, unlike some others. You know, like the top scientists in the Netherlands are doing, who've said there is no need for masks in a normal public setting.

 

The stupidity is of course the large minority who believe the mask is a miracle cure. It is nothing of the sort and there is no direct credible evidence that masks stop the transmission of the virus.

[NanLaew]

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

Of course, if you don't test 99% of the population you'll have death figures like Thailand. To actually quote those manifestly false death figures, when excess death figures clearly show those death figures are false shows you simply don't have a clue.

Any countries out there 'testing 99% of the population'?

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

From your study:  Other meta-analyses have focused on interventions in the health-care setting and have not included non-health-care (eg, community) settings. Our search did not retrieve any systematic review of information on physical distancing, face masks, or eye protection to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV.

 

Interestingly you deliberately left out the last part of the quote: although much of this evidence was on mask use within households and among contacts of cases.  

 

In other words the evidence they had looked at transmissions within households and not in the typical public setting in a supermarket or shopping mall.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

"The use of face masks was protective for both health-care workers and people in the community exposed to infection, with both the frequentist and Bayesian analyses lending support to face mask use irrespective of setting."

[Logosone]

4 minutes ago, ianezy0 said:

Are you really not  noticing world opinion changing on the wearing of masks. Your ignorance is astounding. Message again in 3 months when mandatory wearing of masks will be required in most countries.

 

There has indeed been a change of opinion around the world. Not so long ago the SAGE committee in the UK were saying the evidence for masks is not enough to warrant their use, the CDC in the US were saying face masks are not required, the Robert Koch Institute in Germany was saying there is no evidence to warrant the use of masks, and of course the WHO was saying there is no direct evidence to support the use of masks, and indeed are still saying this.

 

However, due to massive political pressure from a highly vociferous, terrified, minority, who want to introduce measures not based on scientific evidence but on a hunch, there has been somewhat of a change of opinion.

 

Not however among the top scientists of the Netherlands, who have made clear that the evidence does not warrant the introduction of a compulsory duty to wear masks in a normal public setting.

 

So quite something for top scientists advising the government to stand up and say so in the current climate. 

 

I am afraid I trust the top scientists of the Netherlands more than your opinion, ianezy.

[NanLaew]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

The stupidity is of course the large minority who believe the mask is a miracle cure.

But nobody thinks a mask is 'a miracle cure', not even those that wear them religiously think that. What hole did you pull that foolish notion out of?

 

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

It is nothing of the sort and there is no direct credible evidence that masks stop the transmission of the virus.

There's no credible evidence, even your latest Dutch research, that definitively says they don't. The tabloid rag you quote states instances where it can and situations where it can't. It's a pity that is being conflated with 'medical proof'.

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, Logosone said:

.The stupidity is of course the large minority who believe the mask is a miracle cure. It is nothing of the sort and there is no direct credible evidence that masks stop the transmission of the virus.

Nobody believes its a miracle cure where do you get that from? What they believe and there is scientific evidence to prove this, is that its a tool among many that helps to stop the virus especially the presymptomatic stage who are highly contagious.

 

“The peak of viral shedding occurs right before symptoms develop and immediately after, when the symptoms are still mild,”

[NanLaew]

6 minutes ago, Logosone said:

However, due to massive political pressure from a highly vociferous, terrified, minority, who want to introduce measures not based on scientific evidence but on a hunch, there has been somewhat of a change of opinion.

Without uttering more exagerations, can you actually identify this mysteriously powerful, political 'minority' ?

 

No?

 

Thought not.

[Logosone]

4 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Any countries out there 'testing 99% of the population'?

Iceland has embarked on a programme to test 100% of its population. They're making excellent progress and have tested well over 20% of their population. Thailand has tested 1% of its population.

[Logosone]

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

What they believe and there is scientific evidence to prove this, is that its a tool among many that helps to stop the virus especially the presymptomatic stage who are highly contagious.

Well thankfully we now have top government scientists who have reviewed the evidence several times and have made clear that there is no evidence that suggests that masks stop the transmission of the virus ("no direct benefit").

 

So we can put that canard to bed.

 

 

[Logosone]

16 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Without uttering more exagerations, can you actually identify this mysteriously powerful, political 'minority' ?

 

No?

 

Thought not.

Of course I can, nothing mysterious about it at all. In the UK for example:

 

The move, which will be enforced by fines, comes after pressure from labor unions, business lobbyists and opposition politicians, who accused Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government of lacking clarity in its guidance for defeating the pandemic.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-13/masks-to-be-mandatory-in-english-shops-after-pressure-on-johnson

 

The issue of Covid19 has been highly politicised in the extreme, and opposition parties the world over are using it to attack governments in power. But that's just one small part of it, on a local level many local politicians, mayors, etc are under massive pressure from organised lobby groups to introduce compulsory mask wearing.

 

 

 

[rabang]

Masks have become a part virtue signalling and political instead of just being used on scientific basis. I will NOT use a mask in my country and fortunately it is not mandatory and very unlikely to be in future either. I will also avoid travelling to places where masks are mandatory.