• The question of mask effectiveness is still open. There is no hard evidence that they do work, only some hard evidence that they don't. The article below is from july 2020 and lists all known post-Covid randomized control studies. Note that the Danish study is complete as of october 2020, but the results were refused publication from Lancet and two other major journals. Presumably because the results were not politically correct.

    https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/

    btw: the findings of the last study (2015) were that paper masks or non masks make no difference ultimately, to the spread of disease - presumably because so few people wear the things correctly and it's almost impossible to do ALL the time - BUT wearing a CLOTH mask doubles your chances of infection. I figure that's because you're incubating all kinds of shit on there, fungus, bacteria, etc. Like a whole viral load.

  • Note that the Danish study is complete as of october 2020, but the results were refused publication from Lancet and two other major journals.
    Presumably because the results were not politically correct.

    Unlikely. It’s because the study isn’t good enough. Doesn’t mean it’s without merit though.

    Presumably it has been published elsewhere? There are plenty of other journals with less exacting standards.

  • Please consider amending your comment to avoid spreading frankly dangerous disinfo. The 2015 study focuses on healthcare workers in a hospital setting wearing cloth masks, particularly in comparison to surgical grade masks; it does not analyse the effect of generalised use of cloth masks in a non-hospital setting. Suggesting that using a cloth mask in the latter scenario increases one’s chance of COVID-19 infection is unscientific, and IMO reckless.

    The authors of that very study published a letter about cloth mask use to address C19 in March this year:

    COVID-19, shortages of masks and the use of cloth masks as a last resort
    Chandini R MacIntyre, Academic physician The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales
    Other Contributors:
    Chi Dung Tham, Academic physician
    Holly Seale, Academic
    Abrar Chughtai, Academic physician

    Critical shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) have resulted in the US Centers for Disease Control downgrading their recommendations for health workers treating COVID-19 patients from respirators to surgical masks and finally to home-made cloth masks. As authors of the only published randomised controlled clinical trial of cloth masks, we have been getting daily emails about this from health workers concerned about using cloth masks. The study found that cloth mask wearers had higher rates of infection than even the standard practice control group of health workers, and the filtration provided by cloth masks was poor compared to surgical masks. At the time of the study, there had been very little work done in this space, and so little thought into how to improve the protective value of the cloth masks. Until now, most guidelines on PPE did not even mention cloth masks, despite many health workers in Asia using them.

    Health workers are asking us if they should wear no mask at all if cloth masks are the only option. Our research does not condone health workers working unprotected. We recommend that health workers should not work during the COVID-19 pandemic without respiratory protection as a matter of work health and safety. In addition, if health workers get infected, high rates of staff absenteeism from illness may also affect health system capacity to respond. Some health workers may still choose to work in inadequate PPE. In this case, the physical barrier provided by a cloth mask may afford some protection, but likely much less than a surgical mask or a respirator.

    It is important to note that some subjects in the control arm wore surgical masks, which could explain why cloth masks performed poorly compared to the control group. We also did an analysis of all mask wearers, and the higher infection rate in cloth mask group persisted. The cloth masks may have been worse in our study because they were not washed well enough – they may become damp and contaminated. The cloth masks used in our study were products manufactured locally, and fabrics can vary in quality. This and other limitations were also discussed.

    There are now numerous reports of health workers wearing home made cloth masks, or re-using disposable mask and respirators, and asking for guidance. If health workers choose to work in these circumstances, guidance should be given around the use.

    There have been a number of laboratory studies looking at the effectiveness of different types of cloth materials, single versus multiple layers and about the role that filters can play. However, none have been tested in a clinical trial for efficacy. If health workers choose to work using cloth masks, we suggest that they have at least two and cycle them, so that each one can be washed and dried after daily use. Sanitizer spray or UV disinfection boxes can be used to clean them during breaks in a single day. These are pragmatic, rather than evidence-based suggestions, given the situation.

    Finally for COVID-19, wearing a mask is not enough to protect healthcare workers – use of gloves and goggles are also required as a minimum, as SARS-CoV-2 may infect not only through the respiratory route, but also through contact with contaminated surfaces and self-contamination.

About

Avatar for radar71 @radar71 started