MSNBC medical contributor tells Americans to start wearing masks again after uptick in COVID hospita

“At the beginning of the summer, The Lancet had published a study about the effectiveness of face masks and social distancing. Those advocating mandatory masking could pick out a few sentences here and there; analyses indicated that face masks had a protective effect—particularly among healthcare workers. Shielding one’s eyes offered another layer of protection against infection. But the study also concluded that none of these interventions offered complete protection, and that optimal use required ‘risk assessment and several contextual considerations’.

Keeping your distance was one thing: it worked, without a doubt. Recommendations about keeping at least one metre’s distance led to a ‘large reduction’ in the number of infections.

Tegnell thought the study was done well—and that it showed the Swedish recommendations to be at the right level. Social distancing worked. Face masks, on the other hand, might even do more harm than good. He was supported by a medical commentary from Läkartidningen, in which the chief physician and professor Kjell Torén summed up the state of play in the research world: ‘Weak Evidence for Face Masks Reducing Infection among the Public’.”

— The Herd: how Sweden chose its own path through the worst pandemic in 100 years by Johan Anderberg
https://a.co/fA61cVq

 

Unmasking the mask studies: why the effectiveness of surgical masks in preventing respiratory infections has been underestimated - PMC (nih.gov)
"Some empirical studies find masks to be effective in preventing disease transmission, whereas others do not.16,18–26 We determined that the studies that did not find masks to be effective were under-powered to such an extent that even if masks were 100% effective, they still would have been unlikely to find a statistically significant result. None of the studies we analyse that did not find masks to be effective had sufficient statistical power. Our results concerning the statistical power of mask studies are summarized in Figure 1, which shows that all studies that had a large enough sample size and/or adherence for 80% power (above and to the right of the grey lines) show a statistically significant reduction in infections among mask-wearers. As would be expected, most studies with less statistical power (towards the lower left) did not find a statistically significant effect."

 

From the above paper:

What is the fraction? The conclusion is that surgical masks do not stop 100% of aerosol particles from exiting or entering masks.

The follow on question which is not addressed and not even discussed then is how many people wearing masks have been infected by Covid virus transported on airborne aerosol particles and how many infected people wearing masks have transmitted Covid virus to those around them.

 

More than zero!

That isn't the conclusion at all! And so what? Not one person or study has ever claimed that any mask could ever be fully effective. Why would anyone even think that possible?

The whole point of wearing one is to LIMIT spread as part of a series of steps that include washing frequently, social distancing etc. To what extent depends on the mask type, the number of people smart enough to wear one(!), the number of infected people in any dynamic and indoors or outdoors.

Well since that wasn't the purpose/subject of the damn paper! The follow on question IS discussed elsewhere, plenty of times, by statistics relating to the mask effectiveness! How can you not understand that?
Largest study on masks and Covid-19 demonstrates their effectiveness in the real world | Yale Economic Growth Center
"Blood tests showed the overall reduction in symptomatic infection to be 9%, with the most vulnerable group (ages 60+) seeing a decrease of 35% for those wearing surgical masks. "

Here, another question for you to address (alongside the others you have thus far evaded!):

Are you suggesting that masks make no difference to virus transmission?

 

If all masks leak virus bearing aerosol particles masks don’t limit the spread.

 

Your analysis is fundamentally flawed but I will leave it to you to figure that out.

The point is that aerosol particles carrying Covid virus pass through surgical masks. Use 44%, 63%, or 70% - in a practical sense it doesn't matter. Thousands of aerosol particles Per Minute from an individual or individuals are exhaled through surgical masks into the environment occupied by other uninfected individuals either masked or not masked. The uninfected individuals then breath in some of these aerosol particles containing virus and become infected. N95 respirators if glued to the face are 100% effective. But they were not required by any state and the information on the various masks was not emphasized and high lighted to the general public in 2020 - 2021.

How many aerosol particles containing Covid virus does it take to infect someone? The answer is one.

If you are coughing you shouldn't be out in public or in proximity to anyone at high risk from Covid.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abd9149

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zpsysg8

 

The thing is, if somebody knows nothing about a subject, why would they put so much effort into stopping such an obviously productive mechanism, in limiting Sars-2? It makes no sense at all. Clearly not one of these conspiracy theorists has got a clue what they are talking about, yet look at how many "anti-mask" threads there are!

Virologists, the people who do this for a living, analyze it, test it, study it, say that wearing a mask will limit the spread of the virus. What possible gain is there to NOT wear a mask or make loads of noise about having to wear one? It's advisory to begin with and hardly an invasion of civil liberties! Wear a mask, limit the spread, give yourself a better chance of not catching this. If there actually IS anyone undecided, just put one on - really, what have you got to lose?

 

35% of exhaled aerosol particles contain virus. That’s huge. And damning evidence against the claim that surgical masks prevent transmission and provide protection.

 

The problem is that people assume masks protect them. They don’t.

 

Your estimate was 35%.

 

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abd9149

 

Did you read the explanation of the infectious dose? Do you think those experts agree with your hilarious "1 particle" crap?

 

Answer the bolded.

 

You quoted this and ignored its content!

 

I'm being played here. One of us is making clear coherent arguments that are getting completely ignored the other is a conspiracy theorist who has not established any sensible explanation for any of their claims!

Option 1:
A quite enormous number of people are involved in fabricating data to create the illusion that wearing a mask can offer some protection against catching covid-19. They want to force you to wear masks(by advising it) when in public and this for some bafflingly unknown reason that offers them zero benefit. This astonishing deception is ONLY apparent to conspiracy theorists.

Option 2:
They are all telling the truth and masks offer some protection. They genuinely want to limit the spread. All experts in the field, the vastest of vast consensus say the conspiracy theorists are talking horseshit.

Now I ask anyone with a semblance of critical thinking and logic, which one seems to be the more realistic?

Can we have an answer to this extremely relevant question?
What world of batshit gain is there to enforce mask-wearing if it isn't needed! Go on, answer that!

 

A study found that a subset of COVID-19 patients release up to 10 x 10exp5 to 10 x 10exp7 SARS-CoV-2 genome copies per hour in exhaled breath

 

I ignored it because many other lab studies have shown that surgical masks do not protect or prevent because they allow aerosol particles to flow through them.

 

Explain what that means. See if you can work out a) where they were for the study and b) why these types of people don't tend to go out.

Then explain why the hell you didn't cite the study!

But hey, if they did, wearing a mask will definitely limit the spread of any expelled virus. Didn't you know that? The experts all agree this.

What world of batshit gain is there to enforce mask-wearing if it isn't needed!

 

The paper explains what that means.

 

It means that surgical masks do not protect or prevent Covid infection.

 

I'm fairly sure you just shot yourself in the foot. There indeed is YOUR answer!
Of the studies that did not find masks effective - NONE had sufficient statistical power.

 

Are you yanking my chain!! Cite the paper! It means nothing of the sort, that is conspiracy hogwash.

1. YOU explain what it means. We both know YOU don't understand it at all. You didn't even supply the damn paper!
2. You are ignoring 95% of posts because they are inconvenient.
3. Are you really afraid to be wrong? You seem afraid to answer simple questions and basic requests.
4. After you have explained those stats, see if you can work out a) where they were for the study and b) why these types of people don't tend to go out.
5. Then explain why the hell you didn't cite the study!
8. What world of batshit gain is there to enforce mask-wearing if it isn't needed!

 

Nice try. Now use the correct quote.

 

Post 600.

 

Post 600 is my reference showing masks to be VERY effective whilst analyzing and discrediting the poor studies that concluded they were not.

Yes they do. Doctors and surgeons wear them for a reason, even children understand this.