The Only Real-Life Mask Study Did Not Test Actual Virus Exposure
(Editor's Note: I've not been given permission to publish this piece. If the CFP or the author objects I will take it down and replace it with a link, but I think this piece is so important I'm publishing it now. RK)
Mask Science: What is the science for covid masks? This Question is a meaningful study since so much effort is exerted into claiming the absolute effectiveness of masks. Outlined here are some problems with the mask manifesto position. But the menacing socialist trick of claiming only one “right” answer exists for most topics makes a mockery of democracy. Opinions are enforced by consensus via shame campaigns, intimidation and scorn. But science never sleeps and now MIT just published a study challenging the social distancing 6-Foot Rule!
Only One Real World Mask Study EVER DONE!
Righteous Scorn: Yet, here—there is no simple definition of ‘mask,’ and most masks are ill-fitting, and re-use soils them, making them less effective. Most shocking—the most common mask, the square, folded cloth style—tested at 1% effectiveness at stopping small, virus-sized particles. So, the smug euphoria of unthinking mask zealots is both entertaining and terrifying. But many well-meaning Americans swept up in the pre-ordained consensus position feel, deep-down, their majority is a mirage, a travesty of insight, which cannot work out well for the future of liberty.
Only One Real World Mask Study EVER DONE! : Despite widespread propaganda— “information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view” celebrating masks, the science is woefully lacking. See Poynter Institute’s, “Why randomized controlled trials on mask wearing and the coronavirus are scant” from 3/12/21, stating:
“Because of ethical considerations, scientists haven’t conducted randomized controlled trials to conclusively prove the effectiveness of mask-wearing on interrupting coronavirus transmission. According to Dr Babak Javid of UCSF, ONLY ONE randomized controlled trial of mask use has been conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the study didn’t analyze source control – the ability of masks to prevent infected wearers from spreading the virus to other people – which is the primary reason why scientists believe masks are effective at interrupting transmission. Huge numbers of trial participants did not comply with directions, with less than half the people in the masked group reporting that they wore face coverings as instructed. In addition, the study was conducted at a time when other public health guidelines such as social distancing were being implemented, making it difficult to tell what protection came from the masks and what came from these other measures”
DANMASK-19—the only actual-use Covid mask study recorded
In other words, this study, known as DANMASK-19—the only actual-use Covid mask study recorded—was meaningless. In fact, masks in laboratory settings are much more effective than in real life, according to The Conversation: “In controlled laboratory situations, face masks appear to do a good job of reducing the spread of coronavirus (at least in hamsters) and other respiratory viruses. However, evidence shows mask-wearing policies seem to have had much less impact on the community spread of COVID-19.”
Most Masks Ineffective?: After 16 months of pesky masks, we all know these are re-used, pulled down to eat, drink, breathe and talk, or often forgotten on our chins. Further, masks are made from various fabrics, which aren’t all equally effective. And masks are often reused until filthy and broken. Now here is the effectiveness of 9 various masks for stopping virus sized particles:
Effectiveness of 9 various masks for stopping virus sized particles
- Bandanas—useful to reduce projectile sneezes down from 8ft to 4ft.
- Popular small folded style: Square, ribbed cloth masks. Estimated 1% effective.
- Recycled, T-Shirt material thin masks: 1/3rd as effective as surgical masks.
- Store bought cloth masks: With 3 layers, might be 50% effective.
- Cloth mask w/ added filter: From 35%-70% effective.
- Neck Gaiter/ Balaclavas: This synthetics style is worse than nothing.
- Surgical Mask—Disposable, Small, Square : Might filter 60% of small particles.
- Cone, Round Masks: Less effective than cloth masks.
- N95 Surgical Masks: Up to 95% effective if used properly.
Reused Masks: The typical mask is reused, thrown on the car floor, picked up to re-use—often stained and damaged. So how does that affect safety? The above masks are mostly cloth, about which Centers for Disease Control stated: “Cloth masks have been used in healthcare and community settings to protect the wearer from respiratory infections. The use of cloth masks during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is under debate. The filtration effectiveness of cloth masks is generally lower than that of medical masks and respirators.”
Homemade Masks & Shields: The journal Science Advances commented on homemade masks: “Mandates for mask use in public during the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, saw widespread use of homemade masks and mask alternatives. It is assumed that wearing such masks reduces the likelihood for an infected person to spread the disease, but many of these mask designs have not been tested in practice.”
N95 Masks Not Recommended for Amateurs? A Singapore study, stated: “Of participants given N95 respirators with an instruction sheet and then asked to put one on, only about 13% passed the visual mask fit test, reported Wesley Yeung, MBBS, of National University Hospital in Singapore.”
Pro’s Against Maskers: Some experts still publicly oppose mask use. Dr. Eli Perencevich, epidemiologist at Iowa’s College of Medicine stated, “The average healthy person does not need to have a mask, and they shouldn’t be wearing masks. There’s no evidence that wearing masks on healthy people will protect them.” According to Foundation of Economic Education, “Research published in Annals of Internal Medicine last month found both surgical and cloth masks proved ineffective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19.” (later retracted)Desire for more statism
And U. of Minnesota published this commentary, “Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data”:
“If the data are limited, how can we say face coverings are likely not effective? We agree that the data supporting the effectiveness of a cloth mask or face covering are very limited. We do, however, have data from laboratory studies that indicate cloth masks or face coverings offer very low filter collection efficiency for the smaller inhalable particles we believe are largely responsible for transmission, particularly from pre- or asymptomatic individuals who are not coughing or sneezing. At the time we wrote this article, we were unable to locate any well-performed studies of cloth mask leakage when worn on the face—either inward or outward leakage. As far as we know, these data are still lacking. The guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for face coverings initially did not have any citations for studies of cloth material efficiency or fit, but some references have been added since the guidelines were first posted.”
Conclusion: Wear Masks if You Like: People who feel strongly should wear masks, but mandates should be permissive, not mandatory. But the flouting of mask rules by celebrities and politicians, like Obama, tell us how afraid the elites are when they think no one is watching. Still, masks can cut risks and we should wear a new, properly fitted mask whenever interacting with known cases of Covid. Yet, much erroneous information has been circulated, leaving most people confused. Great concern is growing that the US government is misusing covid to gain greater control over the lives of individuals, the economy and healthcare system. I will leave you to decide whether that is true but many events, like insisting on paying able bodied souls to stay home, rather than work, have no transparently clear explanation outside of desire for more statism. Shalom, friends—and please be wise.