Here’s Why the Science Is Clear That Masks Work

[onthedarkside]

 

The debate over masks’ effectiveness in fighting the spread of the coronavirus intensified recently when a respected scientific nonprofit said its review of studies assessing measures to impede the spread of viral illnesses found it was “uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses.”

 

Now the organization, Cochrane, says that the way it summarized the review was unclear and imprecise, and that the way some people interpreted it was wrong.

 

“Many commentators have claimed that a recently updated Cochrane review shows that ‘masks don’t work,’ which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation,” Karla Soares-Weiser, the editor in chief of the Cochrane Library, said in a statement.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/10/opinion/masks-work-cochrane-study.html

 

[onthedarkside]

Read more with no paywall: https://archive.ph/MsGnj

[CharlieKo]

Don't believe it.

[KhunLA]

Social distancing ... works

Mask ... don't work for multiple reason

 

IMHO

[HappyExpat57]

We will never know conclusively. There are plenty of credible reports for either side of the argument. For that reason I wish the subject would just go away like a bad smell.

[tomazbodner]

1 hour ago, CharlieKo said:

Don't believe it.

You don't believe what? Did you actually read that full article, which explains why the results were inconclusive? Or is this just your unsubstantiated response to the headline?

[brewsterbudgen]

All a bit irrelevant; until the next pandemic!

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Statement on 'Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses' review

 

Update from Cochrane:

 

"The Cochrane Review 'Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses' was published in January 2023 and has been widely misinterpreted.

...

Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.

...

It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive."

 

(more)

 

https://www.cochrane.org/news/statement-physical-interventions-interrupt-or-reduce-spread-respiratory-viruses-review

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

More than the above, a lot of experts in the field have maintained that not only has the original Cochrane article been misinterpreted by some, but even moreso, that the original article and findings themselves were flawed and not scientifically sound.

 

Examples include:

 

People say new research proves masks don’t work. That’s bogus

...

"There were 15 years of different studies included in this mega review of 78 research papers — six pertained to COVID, but many more were about flu. Some covered masks, while others assessed the impact of handwashing and gargling on disease transmission. 

 

Perhaps most importantly, several mask studies included in the new review didn't require anyone to actually wear a mask — rather, researchers just handed masks out to some people, and not others, to see if disease rates were better when masks were available (they were.)"

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/people-say-new-research-proves-masks-don-t-work-that-s-bogus/ar-AA18mdiB

 

AND

 

COMMENTARY: Wear a respirator, not a cloth or surgical mask, to protect against respiratory viruses

 

Two recent publications conclude there are no differences between surgical masks and respirators for preventing person-to-person transmission of infectious respiratory viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and influenza. But these studies are deeply flawed.

...

The Cochrane review must be considered in the context of the authors' biases.

...

The Cochrane review has a number of serious methodological flaws, as well.

 

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/commentary-wear-respirator-not-cloth-or-surgical-mask-protect-against-respiratory-viruses

 

AND

 

Q&A: What a major review does and does not tell us about masks and COVID-19

 

"A major limitation is that many of the mask studies took place in health care settings, and the health care workers wore masks only when interacting with patients. The health care workers probably did not wear masks at other times, like at home or when interacting with people in the community — for example, restaurants, shopping, socializing — and they easily could have picked up infections in those other settings.

...

There is no question that a high-quality, well-fitting mask can reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection if worn properly and consistently."

 

--Linsey C. Marr, PhD, the Charles P. Lunsford Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Virginia Tech University and an expert on airborne virus transmission and mask technology

 

https://www.healio.com/news/infectious-disease/20230216/qa-what-a-major-review-does-and-does-not-tell-us-about-masks-and-covid19

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

On 3/11/2023 at 7:58 AM, HappyExpat57 said:

We will never know conclusively. There are plenty of credible reports for either side of the argument. For that reason I wish the subject would just go away like a bad smell.

 

The science and opinion of experts and researchers in the field is pretty clear -- consistent and well-fit masks DO reduce the risks of becoming infected with an airborne virus.....

 

The general consensus is that N95 class masks called "respirator" masks provide the best protection, followed by so-called surgical masks, and then cloth masks generally the least effective.

 

Where things fall down, though, is when it comes to human behavior. The masks provide protection only to the extent people actually wear them. And when they take them off or don't wear them properly, then they're at greater risk again.

 

So, as an example, someone could wear an N95 mask at work all day, and be reasonably well protected.  Then they go home after work and play with the kids who caught an asymptomatic COVID infection from other kids at school, and then, bingo, Mom or Dad have a case of COVID....

 

And it's not because the mask wearing didn't work. It's because the best masks only work, that is, reduce the risks by varying degrees, when they're actually worn!

 

[HappyExpat57]

6 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The science and opinion of experts and researchers in the field is pretty clear -- consistent and well-fit masks DO reduce the risks of becoming infected with an airborne virus.....

 

The general consensus is that N95 class masks called "respirator" masks provide the best protection, followed by so-called surgical masks, and then cloth masks generally the least effective.

 

Where things fall down, though, is when it comes to human behavior. The masks provide protection only to the extent people actually wear them. And when they take them off or don't wear them properly, then they're at greater risk again.

 

So, as an example, someone could wear an N95 mask at work all day, and be reasonably well protected.  Then they go home after work and play with the kids who caught an asymptomatic COVID infection from other kids at school, and then, bingo, Mom or Dad have a case of COVID....

 

And it's not because the mask wearing didn't work. It's because the best masks only work, that is, reduce the risks by varying degrees, when they're actually worn!

 

And there are many anti-vaxxers/anti-common sense folks who will deluge the airwaves with evidence to the contrary. In my completely unimportant opinion, I agree that proper masks help. My point is I am weary of the debate.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

10 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

My point is I am weary of the debate.

I'm weary of posters who continue to flood the forum with entirely unsourced and unsubstantiated misinformation -- often claims originating from rubbish sources that previously have been proven as flatly false -- on life/health important issues including face mask wear, vaccines, COVID etc.

[ding]

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

I' with entirely unsourced and unsubstantiated misinformation-- on life/health important issues including face mask wear, vaccines, COVID etc.

I read studies, I guess I'm odd that way. Especially for things that impact health.

 

A post may interest me but I always always need to research it. Especially when it's medical, usually on pubmed or Semantic Scholar, before I consider acting on it. I listen to proven trustworthy doctors and PhD's lecture or interview on YouTube but have to filter them first.

 

I'm always looking for where I'm wrong so I can adjust course. That just doesn't bother me.

 

If there's an RCT with a big n= and tight control that says masks never worked and never will, I'll stop. But the studies I see saying they don't work are garbage data. People saying they wear a mask when it's under their nose, for example. Hard to control for free-living, self-reported nonsense data.

[KhunLA]

Even if the masks work, (they don't IMHO), unless wearing complete eye protection, they are useless. Again ... IMHO

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Even if the masks work, (they don't IMHO), unless wearing complete eye protection, they are useless. Again ... IMHO

AFAIK, there's no credible evidence that COVID virus infection via the eyes (while possible and the subject of some studies) actually accounts for any meaningful share of infections. Same with surface contact.

 

It's primarily a respiratory infection route, which is why good masks are important, as they reduce the risk from the PRIMARY route of infection.

 

[ding]

46 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

which is why good masks are important, as they reduce the risk from the PRIMARY route of infection.

 

People who ridicule mask-wearing would never tell the surgeon to not wear a mask before their surgery.

I sometimes ask them why surgeons wear masks.

[brewsterbudgen]

3 minutes ago, ding said:

People who ridicule mask-wearing would never tell the surgeon to not wear a mask before their surgery.

I sometimes ask them why surgeons wear masks.

Because they work in hospitals with sick patients and are in direct contact with open wounds.  They wear surgical gowns and gloves too.  If you're worried, there's nothing stopping you wearing the same.

[BritManToo]

4 minutes ago, ding said:

People who ridicule mask-wearing would never tell the surgeon to not wear a mask before their surgery.

I sometimes ask them why surgeons wear masks.

And in a previous answer from a surgeon ..........

The oxygen levels in the OR are raised to offset the increased CO2 caused by the mask.

The mask is replaced with a new mask every hour.

And it's totally different to a person wearing a mask outside for 8hrs a day and keeping the same mask for 2 weeks.

[ding]

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

 

And it's totally different to a person wearing a mask outside for 8hrs a day and keeping the same mask for 2 weeks.

What is the purpose of the mask in all surgical theaters everywhere on planet earth?

[BritManToo]

13 minutes ago, ding said:

What is the purpose of the mask in all surgical theaters everywhere on planet earth?

Mainly to avoid blood splatter IMHO.

But you deliberately only partially quoted me.

Wearing a new mask every hour is completely different to wearing the same dirty mask for a week.

How often do you replace the mask you wear?

Every hour?

[ding]

8 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Because they work in hospitals with sick patients and are in direct contact with open wounds. 

What is it that happens between the surgeons mouth and the wet tissue?

[brewsterbudgen]

9 minutes ago, ding said:

What is it that happens between the surgeons mouth and the wet tissue?

Whatever it is it's disgusting and as @BritManToo has tried to explain to you, requires the mask to be changed regularly.

[ding]

12 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Mainly to avoid blood splatter IMHO.

Yep! Add a little research and I bet you'll probably find airborne particulates too.

 

Infection rate is important when looking for a surgeon but nearly impossible to discover.

[BritManToo]

2 minutes ago, ding said:

Yep! Add a little research and I bet you'll probably find airborne particulates too.

 

Infection rate is important when looking for a surgeon but nearly impossible to discover.

You still haven't answered how often you change your mask?

I'm still using the same mask I was given at the start of COVID in March 2020.

 

Would also point out surgeons don't touch their masks ever, touching = new mask required.

[ding]

25 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Whatever it is it's disgusting and as @BritManToo has tried to explain to you, requires the mask to be changed regularly.

Smart people try to explain things to me all the time but I just read studies and see what stupid people try to explain to me.

 

Nature

 

Quote

As a key practical conclusion, our results strongly corroborate the efficacy of surgical masks at significantly reducing emission of expiratory particles into the surrounding air, despite the existence of non-filtered leakage flows around the sides of the mask. In other words, the existence of such leakage flows does not obviate mask wearing; rather, our results confirm that mask wearing provides a significant reduction in the probability of disease transmission via expiratory particles, especially when both the infected and susceptible individuals wear masks. Further, without a mask the expiratory airflow will travel directly away from the talker or cougher in a high velocity plume towards others who may be nearby51, whereas with mask wearing the leakage flows are redirected upwards, sideways, and downward leading to more rapid dilution along with a reduction in the velocity of the outward jet

 

[ding]

18 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

You still haven't answered how often you change your mask?

 

Correct.

But did you see this one in Nature ?

[brewsterbudgen]

21 minutes ago, ding said:

Smart people try to explain things to me all the time but I just read studies and see what stupid people try to explain to me.

 

Nature

 

 

Nice deflection! ????

[BritManToo]

29 minutes ago, ding said:

Correct.

But did you see this one in Nature ?

On ignore. 

[Will B Good]

On 3/11/2023 at 3:29 AM, brewsterbudgen said:

All a bit irrelevant; until the next pandemic!

Maybe not.....Chinese city going into lockdown this week over flu.

[KhunLA]

5 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

AFAIK, there's no credible evidence that COVID virus infection via the eyes (while possible and the subject of some studies) actually accounts for any meaningful share of infections. Same with surface contact.

 

It's primarily a respiratory infection route, which is why good masks are important, as they reduce the risk from the PRIMARY route of infection.

 

Since your eyes drain down into you nostril cavity, any covid infected droplets in your eyes, then simply  bypass the mask, and are breathed in.  Again, making mask without eye protection...useless.