Latest 'Gold Standard' Review Puts The Final Nail In The Coffin For Masks

I was advocating for respirators more than two years ago.

You and many rightwing anti-mask, anti-vax jackasses mock people trying to protect themselves.

You haven't learned P100 and N100 respirators provide reliable protection if worn properly.

I invite other people to read the CDC "article."

"Quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) studies have been conducted to understand and characterize the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission and evaluate the need for and effectiveness of prevention measures to reduce risk. Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection. Some studies estimated exposure risks primarily using outdoor environmental SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification data. They noted that their QMRA estimates are subject to uncertainty that can be reduced with additional data to improve the accuracy and precision of information that is entered into the models. Concentrations of infectious SARS-CoV-2 on outdoor surfaces could be expected to be lower than indoor surfaces because of air dilution and movement, as well as harsher environmental conditions, such as sunlight. One QMRA study also evaluated the effectiveness of prevention measures that reduce the risk of fomite transmission and found that hand hygiene could substantially reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from contaminated surfaces, while surface disinfection once- or twice-per-day had little impact on reducing estimated risks."​

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/science-and-research/surface-transmission.html

You keep trying to get people not wear respirators. Why?

 

Those of you who were hysterical about your safety yet refused to wear one of these to insure your personal safety yet demanded I wear a bullshit cloth mask?



Those people were the hysterical authoritarian jackasses.

You were not serious about your safety. You just wanted everyone else to blame incase you got sick.

I'm glad we can finally see that the mandates were do nothing bullshit.

 

There has been research during the pandemic that shows that masks and other protective measures are not entirely useless to protect from Covid. Below is some research and articles about research that demonstrates that masks have been effective. Again type of mask is important, correct wear etc etc. You are making sweeping remarks that are wrong.

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/09/surgical-masks-covid-19.html

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2014564118

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abi9069

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2020.594269/full

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-022-01814-3

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ettings-december-2021-update-12-december-2021

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/de...ovid-19-face-masks-community-first-update.pdf

https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/10.2217/fvl-2021-0032

https://accesskent.com/Health/pdf/COVID-19/The-effectiveness-of-face-masks_08262021.pdf

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0271517

https://www.news-medical.net/news/2...VID-for-mask-wearers-vs-non-mask-wearers.aspx

 

A good idea.

Not "viral particles" (whatever THAT is), but viruses. Viruses without any fluid around them.

Yes.

Infection could possibly result from said exposure.

I am in agreement that viruses are also, at least momentarily, contained inside of droplets and aerosols. You continue to ignore the existence of evaporation.

There is no such thing as a "naked virus".

There is no such thing as a "naked virus".

There is no "rather than". Viruses are in droplets, aerosols, and on their own (this is where you ignore evaporation).

RQAA.

 

Fake Science Kills -- especially during a replication crisis.
Think carefully.

"The journal’s editor, Richard Horton, said he was appalled by developments. “This is a shocking example of research misconduct in the middle of a global health emergency,” he told the Guardian."
THE GUARDIAN, Covid-19: Lancet retracts paper that halted hydroxychloroquine trials, By Sarah Boseley Health editor, June 5, 2020.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-paper-that-halted-hydroxychloroquine-trials

 

Did you even read any of the information? What do hydroxychloroquine trials have to do with masks and it was a garbage treatment that was tested repeatedly and proven as useless? Your change of subject shows you can’t refute studies directly related to masks. The misinformation that you promote definitely kills.

 

Focus: Why should I assume that your sources are. credible?

Are your sources more credible than Lancet which was caught red handed promoting Fake Science to stop clinical trials?

 

RAAA.

 

Establishing you don't know enough to deal with what I wrote, so you grace us with an idiotic comment.

 

Why are hospital workers wearing them? You figure they don't know as much as Old Joe? Fauci, btw, consistently wore respirators. Gavin Newsom was married to this hag...



He can't be that bright.

 

It should have been "Duh."

 

Of course, you provided misinformation when you claimed a $20 respirator is way less effective than a very expensive respirator.

You must think everyone has the same urge to play with their face that you have to play with yours.

The TRUTH is you don't know what you're talking about and appear to take some satisfaction in misleading people.

He figured you out.

 

Wanna run that by me again?

You would be surprised at how often you touch your face without thinking about it. Rubbing your eyes...scratching your nose, wiping your mouth. And we are much more likely to do that while wearing something that causes us to sweat and creates acne.

You haven't said anything so far. The argument was regarding the mask mandates being worthless. The mask mandates allowed for low tier cloth crap masks. The proof is in the pudding that the virus spread globally and without issues for the past 2-3 years regardless of mandates. Things have gotten back to normal now, thank god and I hope lessons were learned here.

Your safety is not dependant on my wearing a mask. If you ever felt unsafe, take responsibility for yourself and buy a vyzr mask and look the fool off in the corner. I refuse to placate your hysteria.

 

I never wore a cloth mask. I wore a respirator when masks were required.

Why are you trying to discourage people from taking effective action to protect themselves with total BS about the effectiveness of P100 respirators?

Blather. I wore a P100 respirator that protects me, not others.

You and Trump.

 

Of course, you provided misinformation when you claimed a $20 respirator is way less effective than a very expensive respirator.

People can be trained--or train themselves--not to touch their face. Besides, you can remove the respirator without contaminating yourself.

Anyway, even if you do touch your face, you're unlikely to get covid unless you rub your eyes, touch your nose, etc. If you wash your hands and face, change your clothes... the risk is dramatically reduced.

So, I said we should have never gone to mandates and that we should have gone to respirators for those who want them.

The virus would have spread with or without mask mandates, and it isn't proof of their ineffectiveness.

As I see it, people like you are in need of more knowledge about vaccines, masks and the effectiveness of measures like cancelling large-scale events like concerts, sporting events, indoor dining, etc.

Why I worse P100 respirators.

You're trying to intimidate people into not protecting themselves.

Better my alleged hysteria than your stupidity.

 

You do not speak for anyone other than yourself. The mandates and majority hysterically demanded that I wear a cloth mask so they could feel safe.

I've said now several times that you can wear whatever ridiculous set up you wish.

Again you do not speak for anyone other than yourself while I'm referring to the mandates.

When in doubt, invoke Trump. You can't even follow the discussion, maybe it's from all that mask wearing robbing your brain of oxygen?

(yes I'm joking, masks do not deplete your oxygen intake)

 

You, of course, speak for others?

No, the pols pushed for masks because they were deathly afraid they would be blamed if the hospitals were overrun with covid patients.

That would be fine as a position if you didn't add misinformation about PPE.

You still don't understand how respirators work. Egads.

 

Viruses without fluid around them = not significant source of covid virus transmission. Unsure where you got the idea that is not the case.

 

Please list a few of the experts who wear P100 mask whenever they leave home.

 

Google "bacteria". Do you need to see more video of Fauci in public unmasked?

Your silly ad hominem ageist attack Kimberly Guilfoyle, now 53, seems rather odd, especially in the context of a maskless Gavin Newsom and the rest of the unmasked CA elite.

She was a Victoria Secrets model when she was young. Bunch of "hags"?

You should actually watch the video - count the doctors who were caught unmasked at the French laundry with Newsom -- and think.

Gov Dined Unmasked With Head of Doctors Lobby And Lobbyist At French Laundry says Consumer Watchdog
Head of Injured Patients Group Disappointed After Being Turned Away From Meeting with Gov


NEWS PROVIDED BY
Consumer Watchdog
Nov 18, 2020,
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...laundry-says-consumer-watchdog-301176383.html

 

Incorrect.

Continued ignoring of the existence of evaporation.

 

SIAP. What's worse are posers of scientific thought like the CDC/WHO/NIH all recommended that cloth masks would prevent the spread.

What's doubly worse is our governments were hijacked by authoritarians (all right I'll call them fascists) like the CDC/NIH/WHO who had no clue how to stop the spread of Covid.

 

The SARS-CoV-2 virus degrades rapidly in the presence of evaporation. You continue to ignore the existence of science related to viruses.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7295365/

Finally, we discuss the relevance of the present results in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. The evaporation time of a droplet is a critical parameter as it determines the duration over which the spread of infection from the droplet to another person coming in contact with the droplet is possible. The virus needs a medium to stay alive;5 therefore, once the droplet has evaporated, the virus is not expected to survive. The evaporation time can, therefore, be taken as an indicator of the survival time of the virus. In general, it is regarded that a temperature of 60 °C maintained for more than 60 min inactivates most of the viruses;23 however, contrary reports about the effect of temperature on the survivability of SARS-CoV-2 has been reported.24,25 Our results indicate that the survival time of the virus depends on the surface on which the droplet has fallen, along with the temperature and humidity of the ambient air. The present results are expected to be of relevance in two different scenarios: When droplets are generated by an infected person by coughing or sneezing (in the absence of a protective mask) or when fine droplets are sprayed on a surface for cleaning/disinfecting the surface. A wide range of droplet sizes is expected to be produced in these cases. The mutual interaction of the droplets such that they interfere in the evaporation dynamics is, however, expected to be weak because of the large distance between the droplets, as compared to their diameter.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35512326/

Conclusions: Transmission of infectious SARS-CoV-2 via fomites is possible upon extensive moistening, but it is unlikely to occur in real-life scenarios and from droplet-contaminated fomites.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00251-4

Only a handful of studies have looked for viable virus outside the lab. Tal Brosh-Nissimov, who heads the infectious-diseases unit at the Assuta Ashdod University Hospital in Israel, and his colleagues swabbed personal items and furniture in hospital isolation units and rooms at a quarantine hotel. Half of the samples from two hospitals and more than one-third of samples from the quarantine hotel were positive for viral RNA. But none of the viral material was actually able to infect cells, the researchers reported7.

And

Estimates of transmission based on levels of viral RNA persisting in the environment seem to bear this out. From April to June, environmental engineer Amy Pickering then at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, and her colleagues took weekly swabs of indoor and outdoor surfaces around a town in Massachusetts. On the basis of the levels of RNA contamination and how often people touched surfaces such as doorknobs and buttons at pedestrian crossings, the team estimated10 that the risk of infection from touching a contaminated surface is less than 5 in 10,000 — lower than estimates for SARS-CoV-2 infection through aerosols, and lower than surface-transmission risk for influenza or norovirus.

The risk of fomite-mediated transmission is dependent on:

• The infection prevalence rate in the community
• The amount of virus infected people expel (which can be substantially reduced by wearing masks)
• The deposition of expelled virus particles onto surfaces (fomites), which is affected by air flow and ventilation
• The interaction with environmental factors (e.g., heat and evaporation) causing damage to virus particles while airborne and on fomites
• The time between when a surface becomes contaminated and when a person touches the surface
• The efficiency of transference of virus particles from fomite surfaces to hands and from hands to mucous membranes on the face (nose, mouth, eyes)
• The dose of virus needed to cause infection through the mucous membrane route

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35512326/

Conclusion
The authors conclude that their study provides evidence that fomites are not as critical in the transmission of the disease as they had previously assumed, as well as showing that infectious SARS-CoV-2 virions can be recovered on some fomites for a relatively brief period following contamination with large volumes of saliva

 

This guy wore them a the WTC after 9/11 even though he was more than happy to let police, firemen, etc. wear nothing and get sick.



Why don't you stop spreading misinformation about respirators?

 

You might be interested (although I doubt it given your comments here) in results of tests for high-quality respirators.

"The filtration efficiency of selected NIOSH-approved N95 and P100 FFRs and cartridges was assessed against a MS2 viable viral aerosol challenge under high volumetric flow con- ditions, representative of very high work rates. The N95 and P100 viable mean penetrations were typically less than 2 and 0.03%, respectively, under all flow conditions. Viral aerosols typically do not exist as single airborne viruses, instead they form agglomerates that typically are larger than the MPPS of the filter.(3,4,6) In the controlled laboratory conditions of this study, the resulting MS2 virus MMAD was approximately 500 nm. As a result, the viruses did not penetrate the filters to the extent of aerosols in the MPPS range (typically 40 to 50 nm for N95 filters). Thus, the N95 and P100 FFRs/cartridges tested in this study met or exceeded their efficiency criteria (95 and 99.97%, respectively) against the viable MS2 aerosol challenge even under very high flow breathing conditions."​

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7196694/pdf/UOEH_10_818228.pdf

Ageist attack?

She's a hag because she's an awful person with the brains of a large rodent. Looks (such as they are with pancake makeup) can never compensate.

You figure that's what drew Gov'nor Smartass to her?

Not interested in the doings of hypocrites.

Here's one who wore high-quality protection after 9/11 while letting workers get sick.



Oh, and here's a worker who wore a "mask." You tell her...



And here's one who should have a muzzle...