Here’s Why the Science Is Clear That Masks Work

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

N95 masks possibly do work to a greater or lesser extent.

 

But the public at large wear cheap masks which don't work at all in all honesty. 

 

 

In all honesty your statement the cheap masks don't work is nonsense.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, mommysboy said:

N95 masks possibly do work to a greater or lesser extent.

 

But the public at large wear cheap masks which don't work at all in all honesty. 

 

 

 

Depends on what you mean by "work"...

 

First there's so-called "source control." Even cheap and loose fitting masks have been shown to be helpful in reducing the likelihood of an infected wearer to spread the virus to others...because the mask surface covering their mouth catches their exhaling as they breath.

 

Then there's wearer protection, the ability of the mask to prevent the wearer from breathing in virus elements in the air. That's the area where having a better mask like an N95 mask is more effective than the cheap, simple ones.

 

There have been studies done on all this, but in short, the advice from public health officials these days is -- any properly maintained mask is better than no mask.

 

"Wear a Mask to Protect Yourself and Others

• Masking is a critical public health tool and it is important to remember that any mask is better than no mask.
• Wear the most protective mask you can that fits well and that you will wear consistently."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/masks.html

 

As for the various protection  rates of masks:

 

"A study from Tokyo tested how well different types of masks protected the wearer from actual coronavirus particles. The study showed that even a simple cotton mask offered some protection (17 percent to 27 percent) to the wearer. Medical masks performed better, including a surgical mask (47 percent to 50 percent protection), a loosefitting N95 (57 percent to 86 percent protection) and a tightly sealed N95 (79 percent to 90 percent protection)."

 

https://www.nytimes.com/article/covid-masks-protection-stats.html

 

[mommysboy]

Oh right! I'm talking nonsense I guess.

 

Leaves me wondering why they were about as much use as a chocolate teapot in China where mask use was 100%- as soon as social distancing was stopped the virus spread like wild fire. Within 2 months hundreds of millions had been infected.

 

I'll go on talking nonsense I think.

Edited March 18, 2023 by mommysboy

[likerdup1]

On 3/13/2023 at 4:32 AM, KhunLA said:

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.

It's a common misconception that wearing a common mask mostly protects the person wearing it. There is some protection but It's actually mostly the other way around. Wearing a mask helps protect OTHERS from being infected if the person wearing the mask is infected. If someone wants to wear a mask to completely protect themselves, those masks are much less common and expensive and from what I understand must completely seal around nose, mouth etc. Eyes are not nearly as much of a concern. The nasal cavity and lungs take in air. Eyes take in next to no air at all. I have never read anywhere people being infected by covid or other airborne pathogens via the eyes. Rare if ever I would assume.

Edited September 4, 2023 by likerdup1

[BritManToo]

2 hours ago, likerdup1 said:

It's a common misconception that wearing a common mask mostly protects the person wearing it. There is some protection but It's actually mostly the other way around. Wearing a mask helps protect OTHERS from being infected if the person wearing the mask is infected. If someone wants to wear a mask to completely protect themselves, those masks are much less common and expensive and from what I understand must completely seal around nose, mouth etc. Eyes are not nearly as much of a concern. The nasal cavity and lungs take in air. Eyes take in next to no air at all. I have never read anywhere people being infected by covid or other airborne pathogens via the eyes. Rare if ever I would assume.

Why would I care about OTHERS?

 

[KhunLA]

5 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Why would I care about OTHERS?

 

Exactly.  IF they are that unhealthy, aged, then they should probably avoid people, as much as possible, and buy a real mask & googles, that might offer better protection.

 

Because the crap I see people wear, is basically useless ... IMHO

 

Yet to see anyone, wearing the proper gear, properly ... IMHO

 

YES ... IMHO & past experience,  using a vaper mask, that didn't keep 100% of dust particles out of my nose, in my job, and that's with a huge exhaust fan sucking the bad air away from me.

Edited September 4, 2023 by KhunLA

[dhupverg]

The Cochran review showed that masks don't do anything.  

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full#CD006207-sec-0216

 

Here's a good article that covers it. https://maryannedemasi.substack.com/p/exclusive-lead-author-of-cochrane

 

"Smerconish brought up the 2023 Cochrane review which found no evidence that physical interventions like face masks could stop viral transmission in the community and cited my interview with lead author of the study Tom Jefferson who confirmed, “There is just no evidence that they [masks] make any difference. Full stop.”

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Regarding the Cochrane report referenced above...

 

1. Most of the studies cited in their report had nothing to do with (and predated) COVID...

 

and 2. Cochrane itself later came out publicly and rejected the claims being made that their latest review update concluded masks don't work, calling those assertions "inaccurate and misleading."

 

Cochrane Says Review Does Not Show That ‘Face Masks Don’t Work’ Against Covid-19

"You know that recently published Cochrane review that some have claimed as evidence that face masks don’t work? Well, have some of these claims been a bit, shall we say, too cocky and not Cochrane-y enough? Well, in a statement issued on March 10 by the Cochrane Library, Karla Soares-Weiser, MD, PhD, MSc, Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, emphasized, “Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that ‘masks don't work,’ which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.”

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2023/03/11/cochrane-says-review-does-not-show-that-face-masks-dont-work-against-covid-19/?sh=7b681d331937

 

From Cochrane on their report:

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

"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. Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask-wearing itself reduces people's risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses."

 

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

 

Keep in mind, in addition to the issues addressed above, the Cochrane update isn't any actual research of its own. It's a review and recapping of other prior research in the field, which as I noted above, mostly involved prior studies that didn't have anything to with mask wearing during COVID at all.

 

Don’t believe those who claim science proves masks don’t work

A new scientific review of the efficacy of masks is deeply flawed. That hasn’t stopped some from touting it

 

"Out of the 78 papers analyzed in the review, only two actually studied masking during the Covid-19 pandemic. And both of those found that masks did protect wearers from Covid-19. But these studies are drowned out by the greater number of studies on influenza included, where the benefit of masking is harder to detect because it’s a far less contagious virus than Covid-19."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/27/dont-believe-those-who-claim-science-proves-masks-dont-work

 

For anyone but anti-maskers, at this point, it's pretty hard to use Cochrane as an argument against face masking during COVID when Cochrane itself has disavowed those claims, and little in the actual review had anything to do with masking during COVID.

 

 

Edited September 5, 2023 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Danderman123]

Apparently,  when Republican leaders are ill, they care about the science and use face masks.

[impulse]

What seems to be lost in this discussion about mask effectiveness are the downsides.  Like long exposure to elevated CO2 levels, toxic chemicals used in the masks themselves, and the devastating effect that covering their faces has had on child development. 

 

Not to mention adult interactions. I still remember how great it was when we pretty much quit wearing masks in Texas, and you could actually divine facial expressions and see smiles again.  And I get the biggest kick out of the guys and gals still wearing their masks driving alone in their car...

 

CO2 exposure:  Fresh air has around 0.04% CO₂, while wearing masks more than 5 min bears a possible chronic exposure to carbon dioxide of 1.41% to 3.2% of the inhaled air. Although the buildup is usually within the short-term exposure limits, long-term exceedances and consequences must be considered due to experimental data. US Navy toxicity experts set the exposure limits for submarines carrying a female crew to 0.8% CO₂ based on animal studies which indicated an increased risk for stillbirths. Additionally, mammals who were chronically exposed to 0.3% CO₂ the experimental data demonstrate a teratogenicity with irreversible neuron damage in the offspring, reduced spatial learning caused by brainstem neuron apoptosis and reduced circulating levels of the insulin-like growth factor-1

 

There is a possible negative impact risk by imposing extended mask mandates especially for vulnerable subgroups. Circumstantial evidence exists that extended mask use may be related to current observations of stillbirths and to reduced verbal motor and overall cognitive performance in children born during the pandemic. A need exists to reconsider mask mandates.

 

https://www.cell.com/heliyon/fulltext/S2405-8440(23)01324-5?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS2405844023013245%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

 

With additional data now coming out regarding the toxic chemical exposure from the materials used to make the masks:  Titanium dioxide particles frequently present in face masks intended for general use require regulatory control

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35169246/

 

Just like the vaccines, it may be years before we have a full understanding of the long term effects of the mask and vaccine mandates.

 

 

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 hours ago, impulse said:

https://www.cell.com/heliyon/fulltext/S2405-8440(23)01324-5?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS2405844023013245%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

 

The article you quote above, according to its credits, was written by a bunch of people who have no professional expertise in the subject of the article, including a surgeon/independent researcher, a veterinarian, and a psychologist, among others. And of course, no indication the article in question was peer reviewed by anyone with actual expertise.

 

As for the supposed masks and CO2 issue, per Reuters fact checking:

 

"Firstly, there is no evidence to suggest face masks cause oxygen deprivation that is “dangerous” to adult brains or that prevent a youthful brain from developing properly. A study from U.S. researchers in July found an average face mask did not limit the flow of oxygen to the lungs – and even in test subjects with severe lung diseases....

 

Reuters has previously debunked claims that face masks cause hypercapnia, a condition that develops after inhaling too much carbon dioxide."

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-oxygen/fact-check-face-masks-do-not-cause-terrible-damage-to-the-brain-by-depriving-it-of-oxygen-idUSKBN2761ZW

 

And as for your cite about titatium dioxide particles being found in some face mask materials, the article you cited included the following:

 

"No assumptions were made about the likelihood of the release of TiO₂ particles itself, since direct measurement of release and inhalation uptake when face masks are worn could not be assessed. The importance of wearing face masks against COVID-19 is unquestionable."

 

And the full article continues:

 

"Face mask have an important role in the measures against the COVID-19 pandemic¹. So far, no data are available that indicate that the possible risk associated with the presence of TiO₂ particles in face masks outweighs the benefits of wearing face masks as protection measure."

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-06605-w#Tab1

 

It's also worth noting, that NONE of the dozen Europe sourced masks examined by those researchers were NIOSH certified by the U.S. government agency that regulates masks for safety.

 

And Reuters further commented on the research in a fact check report:

Fact Check-No evidence titanium dioxide in face masks is dangerous to wearers

"Some face masks contain minute quantities of titanium dioxide, a mineral that has been flagged as a possible cancer risk when inhaled, but there is no evidence that mask users inhale it at all, or in harmful quantities."

...

study co-author Jan Mast confirmed to Reuters in an email that his team did not test whether people could actually inhale titanium dioxide from wearing the masks examined in the study. “We did not test this."

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-masks-titanium-dioxide/fact-check-no-evidence-titanium-dioxide-in-face-masks-is-dangerous-to-wearers-idUSL1N32L11T

 

 

Edited September 23, 2023 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

And further:

 

The presence of titanium dioxide in face masks hasn’t been associated with toxicity or any health problems

 

"Titanium dioxide is a naturally occurring mineral used as a whitener, matting agent, sunscreen, and more recently as a nanomaterial. ... Its classification as a “possible carcinogen” to humans was a precautionary measure based on data from studies in rats. However, no studies so far have shown a toxic effect of this compound in humans, even at high levels of occupational exposure."

 

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/titanium-dioxide-face-masks-hasnt-been-associated-with-toxicity-health-problems/

 

Edited September 23, 2023 by TallGuyJohninBKK