To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Seanergy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117742474#Comment_117742474

When you reply to a mask post of mine with a load of non mask waffle and the phrase "poor stuff" I'm not really sure what your posts have to do with anything.

Seanergy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117742842#Comment_117742842

Did he factor in velocity? Can the same volume of a fart that leaves his underwear also get back through his underwear.

Seanergy

A McDonald’s franchise has settled a lawsuit in which workers claimed they were given masks made from dog diapers and coffee filters during the height of the coronavirus pandemic.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mcdonald-lawsuit-dog-diapers-case-b1901534.html

mcmoustache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117739286#Comment_117739286

The proportion of droplets getting through doesn't correlate linearly with the probability of contracting covid. It's one factor of many. If both of us were wearing masks in a sealed coffin for an hour and one of us had covid, two of us would have it by the end.

Let's say it takes 10 covid widgets to get infected and let's day that an infected person releases 100 covid widgets per minute.

If neither I nor the covid infected person wears a mask and I'm in front of them, then I will reach the threshold after 6 seconds.

If I wear a mask offering 20% protection and he doesn't, then I will reach that limit after 7.5 seconds. Not much of an improvement.

Now, if we both wear masks and go with the 95% figure, then I could safely be around this person for nearly two minutes.

That time limit get bigger the farther away we are from the person and the better ventilated the area is. If everyone stayed away from each other and never went into buildings that weren't their own, then covid would be gone without the need for masks. Unfortunately, that's not practical. We need to go to the shops for example, and that's where masks come in. They allow for a longer safe duration. If 20 people, one of whom is infected, are in a bookies for an hour, they might all come out with covid after 30 minutes. With masks, it might only be a couple. Now repeat that over the population every day and it's simple enough to see why mask mandates work.

mcmoustache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117742842#Comment_117742842

Sure, droplets can travel just as easily through both sides unless there's some kind of hydrophobic coating on one side and not the other. It's certainly correct for an ordinary cloth mask but it would only be relevant if people were mouthing each other and forcing their breath through that mask, which thankfully isn't the custom around here. Where I'm from people just wear masks so when I breathe outward, the droplets accelerate in the direction of my mask where they get absorbed like water on a bounty kitchen towel. Most of my breath goes out over my nose but most of those water droplets slammed into something like a kitchen towel while the remainder are bounced in my general direction, keeping you safer.

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117742706#Comment_117742706

Ok, thanks for that. Here is what I found (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817)

• The trial was carried out during April/May 2020 in Denmark, when very few people wore masks
• They took approx 6,000 people and divided them into two groups of roughly 3,000
• Half were told to wear masks, other half told not to wear masks
• After one month the results (from PCR and blood testing) were: 42 people with masks got Covid, 53 people with no masks got Covid.
• Their conclusions were that mask wearing didn't reduce infection in the wearer by the 50% they designed the study to expect.
• They also mention "Reduction in release of virus from infected persons into the environment may be the mechanism for mitigation of transmission in communities where mask use is common or mandated, as noted in observational studies. Thus, these findings do not provide data on the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing in the community in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infections."

So, in that last quote from the actual Danish study they say that these results only relate to the wearer of the mask, and don't provide data on the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing in the community. So anyone claiming that masks don't work, based on this study, are ignoring a big part of the picture, ie., the reduction in transmission from infected people wearing a mask.

Now, to Dr Anthony Lazzarino

• In a comment to a BMJ article on 30/11/2020 (https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4586/rr-6) he writes ". . .the conclusion we must draw is that masks give a protection that is less than 50%. That is a very important message to give to the many people thinking that masks give a protection that is close to 100%. Should those people attend crowded enclosed spaces assuming that masks protect them, they would put themselves at risk."
• That is the same article that your quote comes from, and I agree that in your quote he seems to be guessing that masks don't provide substantial protection for others from an infectious wearer.

Howwever, for a wider context, see this CDC article, updated May 2021, on the subject of mask wearing https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/masking-science-sars-cov2.html?

That CDC article concludes that masks do help prevent the spread of Covid, both in controlling the emission of the virus from infected wearers, and also offering limited protection to wearers from virus in the environment. They also give the details of multiple studies they base their conclusions on.

Going on all the information out there it seems there is a pretty strong case to say masks work!!!

growleaves

Thanks PintofView very interesting.

'So, in that last quote from the actual Danish study they say that these results only relate to the wearer of the mask, and don't provide data on the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing in the community. So anyone claiming that masks don't work, based on this study, are ignoring a big part of the picture'

Its moreso that the results are inconclusive and this is one of the largest studies of this kind.

Dr. Lazzarino may be right or wrong but I know many people (not me) only want to hear from people with strong expertise, particularly in epidemiology, and he definitely qualifies in that regard.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744678#Comment_117744678

The Danish study expressly ruled as out of scope assessing the effectivess of masks as barriers. Public health authorities have always stressed that cloth and surgical masks should not be relied on as direct protection for the wearer.

It would be interesting to read any recent comments from Lazzarino and counterpoints from other experts in response. The quotes you are citing are all from 2020 and he does not provide any studies of his own to support his position.

mcmoustache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744636#Comment_117744636

It can't be pointed out enough that what they were testing was the efficacy of masks on the wearer. That's all. One group wore masks, the control did not. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the effect of masks on the transmission rates in the general population.

I know you included that info but I'm just leaving that here in case people skip past your post.

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744678#Comment_117744678

Its moreso that the results are inconclusive and this is one of the largest studies of this kind.

Yes, the authors say their study was inconclusive. Their results actually found that the mask wearers got less Covid than non-mask people (42 vs 53), but due to the structured of the study (number of participants, number of infections that transpired, etc) statistically they could only say that it was 95% likely results were "compatible with a possible 46% reduction to 23% increase in infection among mask wearers" .

Also remember, this study was only inconclusive on the question of protection masks give to the "wearer". As I mentioned before, the authors specifically said the results "do not provide data on the effectiveness of widespread mask wearing in the community"

Dr. Lazzarino may be right or wrong but I know many people (not me) only want to hear from people with strong expertise, particularly in epidemiology, and he definitely qualifies in that regard.

Yes, I agree that the more credible sources of information will be from experts in the field, and Dr. Lazzarino would fall into that bracket. However his comments in their totality are not strongly dismissive, eg. he says ".. the conclusion we must draw is that masks give a protection that is less than 50% .." so he is allowing for some protection of masks, even to the wearer.

Secondly, we have to assume that the CDC article was composed by experts, and it cites numerous studies that we'd again assume were performed by experts, and it puts a strong case for the positive benefits of masks on the overall outcome for the community.

Seanergy

Dr. Lazzarino may be right or wrong but I know many people (not me) only want to hear from people with strong expertise, particularly in epidemiology, and he definitely qualifies in that regard.

Here are a few mask tweets from Dr Anthony Lazzarino, in no particular order, conclude what you will.

mcmoustache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117746747#Comment_117746747

That's not really great advice but at least it's only reaching 200 followers.

Still, I don't get how he missed all the other epidemiological studies that showed the effect of mask wearing on transmission rates within the population. I would have expected someone with his education to be aware of these things.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117747512#Comment_117747512

He's also very big on making claims for masks being harmful and increasing risks with absolutely zero foundation in terms of referenced studies. It should be noted the Danish study did not detect any harmful impact for the wearers.

I'm not really clear on how he thinks covid is transmitted or can be mitigated, at one point he talks about fully airborne transmission in which case even distancing is of limited value (as it will still be in someone's wake), at other points he talks about fomite transmission risks from touching masks. Again, none of which be backs up with anything.

Seanergy

Still, I don't get how he missed all the other epidemiological studies that showed the effect of mask wearing on transmission rates within the population. I would have expected someone with his education to be aware of these things.

He's selective at best. He went and wrote off all NPI's bar isolation as having no proven effect. The WHO had the quality of evidence on face masks as an NPI as moderate in 2019 WHO 2019 ISBN 978-92-4-151683-9. He then goes from no proven effect to may also make things worse.

His logic is skewed and not based in science. Another crystal clear example of his skewed logic below this WHO NPI chart.

His agenda is unclear, but should he be listened to just because he is epidemiologist, hell no.

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117746747#Comment_117746747

That's interesting input, and shows pretty clearly that Dr Lazzarino is a mask sceptic. I didn't find any evidence that he puts forward for his views, and he seems to be relying on his own though experiments to leads him to these conclusions. I'd be very interested to hear what he has to say about all the other studies that are out there that conclude that masks have a very useful role to play in reducing transmission, but nothing show up from him!

From more searching just now here's just one more study - https://pws.byu.edu/covid-19-and-masks (from Brigham Young University) - concluding that "There is now convincing evidence from multiple controlled experiments5–7 and field observations8–14 that wearing masks reduces the transmission of COVID-19 for healthcare workers and the public." Why doesn't Dr Lazzarino publish a paper showing the flaws in some of those other studies?

Seanergy

That's interesting input, and shows pretty clearly that Dr Lazzarino is a mask sceptic.

Mask sceptic may be too kind as he ventures beyond scepticism and into the void of harm.

By all accounts for the year that was in it, for an epidemiologist, he got sweet F ALL work.

He wrote 4 Covid papers, breakdown: 1 x mask, 2 x hydrogen peroxide, 1 x Tocilizumab and been used by Press/Media 19 times.

LINK & extract below to mask paper.

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m2003

In their editorial to the BMJ,[1] Greenhalgh et al. advise that surgical masks should be worn in public to prevent some transmission of covid-19, adding that we should sometimes act without definitive evidence, just in case, according to the precautionary principle. The Authors quote a definition of the precautionary principle found on Wikipedia, “a strategy for approaching issues of potential harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking.”

However, while no single formulation of that principle has been universally adopted,[2] the precautionary principle aims at preventing researchers and policy makers from neglecting potentially-harmful side effects of interventions. Before implementing clinical and public health interventions, one must actively hypothesise and describe potential side effects and only then decide whether they are worth being quantified on not.

Most scientific articles and guidelines in the context of the covid-19 pandemic highlight two potential side effects of wearing surgical face masks in the public, but we believe that there are other ones that are worth considering before any global public health policy is implemented involving billions of people.

The two potential side effects that have already been acknowledged are:

(1) Wearing a face mask may give a false sense of security and make people adopt a reduction in compliance with other infection control measures, including social distancing and hands washing.[3]

(2) Inappropriate use of face mask: people must not touch their masks, must change their single-use masks frequently or wash them regularly, dispose them correctly and adopt other management measures, otherwise their risks and those of others may increase.[3,4]

Other potential side effects that we must consider are:

(3) The quality and the volume of speech between two people wearing masks is considerably compromised and they may unconsciously come closer. While one may be trained to counteract side effect n.1, this side effect may be more difficult to tackle.

(4) Wearing a face mask makes the exhaled air go into the eyes. This generates an uncomfortable feeling and an impulse to touch your eyes. If your hands are contaminated, you are infecting yourself.

(5) Face masks make breathing more difficult. For people with COPD, face masks are in fact intolerable to wear as they worsen their breathlessness.[5] Moreover, a fraction of carbon dioxide previously exhaled is inhaled at each respiratory cycle. Those two phenomena increase breathing frequency and deepness, and hence they increase the amount of inhaled and exhaled air. This may worsen the burden of covid-19 if infected people wearing masks spread more contaminated air. This may also worsen the clinical condition of infected people if the enhanced breathing pushes the viral load down into their lungs.

(5B) The effects described at point 5 are amplified if face masks are heavily contaminated (see point 2)

(6) While impeding person-to-person transmission is key to limiting the outbreak, so far little importance has been given to the events taking place after a transmission has happened, when innate immunity plays a crucial role. The main purpose of the innate immune response is to immediately prevent the spread and movement of foreign pathogens throughout the body.[6] The innate immunity’s efficacy is highly dependent on the viral load. If face masks determine a humid habitat where the SARS-CoV-2 can remain active due to the water vapour continuously provided by breathing and captured by the mask fabric, they determine an increase in viral load and therefore they can cause a defeat of the innate immunity and an increase in infections. This phenomenon may also interact with and enhance previous points.

In conclusion, as opposed to Greenhalgh et al., we believe that the context of the current covid-19 pandemic is very different from that of the “parachutes for jumping out of aeroplanes”,[7] in which the dynamics of harm and prevention are easy to define and even to quantify without the need of research studies. It is necessary to quantify the complex interactions that may well be operating between positive and negative effects of wearing surgical masks at population level. It is not time to act without evidence.

mcmoustache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117750060#Comment_117750060

I'm somewhat scientifically literate and I can see how that extract could be convincing. If not for the fact that I can see an absense of data and citations and also the fact that I remember the arguments about seat-belts causing riskier driving being similar to claim that mask-wearing makes people reckless (without any foundation), I could potentially believe that nonsense. Plenty of intelligent people that I know could run with that.

It just goes to show how well-written claims by someone in a position of authority could be convincing to someone without the mental tools that might allow them to know the difference between nonsense dressed as science and actual science. Again, I'm not talking about stupid people - smart people can be taken in by this sort of stuff too. To the uncritical eye, it looks fairly solid.

Seanergy

About 90 per cent of complaints about coronavirus restrictions include passengers not wearing face masks, the company said.

Responding to another complaint on Twitter, Irish Rail said its staff “are not responsible for enforcing this and we are calling for our passengers to show personal responsibility and follow the mandatory requirement to wear a face covering where it applies to them.”

“Employees and our security contractors are asked to work with our customers to ensure compliance through co-operation, by engaging with them and encouraging the use of face coverings,” he said.

“We also undertake joint operations with Gardaí, and have received excellent support and response from Gardaí where escalation of issues is needed, in rare instances where customers are behaving in a manner which disregards the health of other customers or employees.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/surge-in-complaints-over-irish-rail-passengers-flouting-covid-restrictions-1.4647604

Seanergy

If similar starts happening here it might be time for the Garda Policing Policy to move from 'the four E’s’ to 'the four F's'.

Fine, Fine, Fine, Fine.

Rise in patients refusing to wear masks or be tested, NI doctors warn

Non-compliant people being aggressive and posing extra burden to North’s health service

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/rise-in-patients-refusing-to-wear-masks-or-be-tested-ni-doctors-warn-1.4647829

Seanergy

Arrest warrant issued in the UK for the Irish Author of "parents need to ‘wake up’ because wearing masks ‘starve children of oxygen’ and 'reduce their IQ'."

is_that_so

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117771040#Comment_117771040

Yeah, that's on about Page 24 of 1984!

Seanergy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117771113#Comment_117771113

We are beyond thoughtcrime and into the realm of unsubstantiated claims with this one.

“The reason that the globalists are pulling down the masks is that oxygen-deprived people are easier to manipulate. If the police stopped doing criminal and unlawful behaviour, this thing would be over. If everybody just stopped wearing masks, this would be over.”

“Wake up parents. Oxygen is required for your brain to function and I am saying to the children and teenagers of the world, to their parents and teachers, the individual ministers and prime ministers across the world have failed you,” she said.

Nothing about unsubstantiated claims on page 24, just CP thoughtcrime malarky.

revelman

Does anyone know what the story is with the Russian approach to mask wearing? I am currently in a part of Europe that gets lots of Russian visitors and, without fail, each and every one of them is wearing their mask in the way this Russian woman is wearing hers: see the first picture in this RTE report: https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0818/1241422-coronavirus-world/

Is it an inherent scepticism of authority given their past? But, if so, why bother to wear the mask in the first place? It is utterly bizarre.

Seanergy

JUST OUT

Response plan for the safe? & sustainable? operation of primary and special schools.

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/e1141-covid-19-response-plan-for-the-safe-and-sustainable-operation-of-primary-and-special-schools/

1. Face Coverings/Masks
2. The wearing of face coverings or masks in general is not a substitute for other measures outlined below (physical distancing, hand hygiene, respiratory etiquette, adequate ventilation, minimising contacts) but they may be used in addition to these protective measures, especially where maintaining physical/social distancing is difficult.
3. Cloth face coverings act as a barrier to help prevent respiratory droplets from travelling into the air and onto other people when the person wearing the face coverings coughs, sneezes, talks or raises their voice. Cloth face coverings are therefore intended to prevent transmission of the virus from the wearer (who may not know that they are infected) to those with whom they come into close contact.

In childcare and educational settings, the implementation of mandatory face-covering usage is challenging, as it is known that children will have a lower tolerance and ability to use the face covering properly, and use of face-coverings by teachers and staff caring for very young children may cause undue stress to the children.

It is not recommended that children attending primary school wear face-coverings.

It is now a requirement for face coverings to be worn by staff members where it is not possible to maintain a physical distance of 2 metres from other staff, parents, essential visitors or pupils.

In certain situations the use of clear visors should be considered, for example staff interacting with pupils with hearing difficulties or learning difficulties.

Cloth face coverings should not be worn by any of the following groups:

•  Primary school children
•  Any person with difficulty breathing
•  Any person who is unconscious or incapacitated
•  Any person who is unable to remove the face-covering without assistance
•  Any person who has special needs and who may feel upset or very uncomfortable
• wearing the face covering, for example persons with intellectual or developmental disabilities, mental health conditions, sensory concerns or tactile sensitivity.

1. Medical Grade Masks
2. Schools must provide medical grade masks in the EN14683 category to all SNAs and teachers in special schools and special classes and those staff by necessity that need to be in close and continued proximity with pupils with intimate care needs including School Bus Escorts.

Wearing a face covering or mask does not negate the need to stay at home if symptomatic.

Seanergy

In childcare and educational settings, the implementation of mandatory face-covering usage is challenging, as it is known that children will have a lower tolerance and ability to use the face covering properly, and use of face-coverings by teachers and staff caring for very young children may cause undue stress to the children.

The cost of getting mandatory masks in the community over the line(within the EAG) last summer continues to be the u13's IMHO.

fun loving criminal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117772813#Comment_117772813

There's plenty of Irish wearing their masks like that as well.

fun loving criminal

Kids in other countries have to wear face masks. But here we get a confusing plan telling us the same thing as last year, face mask aren't a substitute for social distancing and hand washing, so those measures are more important and kids shouldn't wear face masks in schools.

So schools don't know where they stand on this issue since the the main advice is all about social distancing.

Has anyone told them that kids don't social distance?

foxsake

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117774993#Comment_117774993

kids wearing masks in other countries has no baring on whether it's right or not,

it's abhorrent to make kids wear masks .

fun loving criminal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117775023#Comment_117775023

It's not. It's a health measure for controlling the spread of a highly infectious disease.

foxsake

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117775071#Comment_117775071

once you feel safer. don't consider the impact on the kids , all for a virus that has hardly any effect on them.