• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Time for masks to come off in Singapore

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
The fact of the matter is that many people with the flu did not seek treatment because they stayed away from any medical facility.

I was one of them. I normally go to the doc when I have a cough and a fever. Last winter I stayed at home to ride it out for obvious reasons.

The stats for flu are therefore wildly inaccurate because of Covid.
 

nirvarq

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
The fact of the matter is that many people with the flu did not seek treatment because they stayed away from any medical facility.

I was one of them. I normally go to the doc when I have a cough and a fever. Last winter I stayed at home to ride it out for obvious reasons.

The stats for flu are therefore wildly inaccurate because of Covid.


Our own experience shows that covid is milder than flu in SG ask the 60k cases of Bangla workers ! 99% no sick no symptoms but every 2 week must pay for tests still lol............

Because some retard told media/news that his labor supply company makes millions per year lol..............

These Bangla workers took the rap for us sinkies and then now still they can only work and return to dorm like slaves ! So sad and am so grateful and pity them.
 

tanwahtiu

Alfrescian
Loyal
Have u ever see nurse and doktors and dentists wear mask the whole day in hospital. Mask is worn in operation and surgery room to prevent sick doktor and nurses from spreading virus and bacteria from their mouth, and sudden sneeze during operation and surgery.

Since Ww3 is coming do soldiers need to wear masks in battle field?
 

JustLikeThis

Alfrescian
Loyal
Malaysia has 2000 cases everyday and India 200,000. We dare not close our airspace to them so please continue to hire the social distancing officers and weak masks.
 

syed putra

Alfrescian
Loyal
in sg’s hot and humid climate, bra’s and panties should cum off too.
Precusely
FLU has killed more people in the UK than coronavirus for seven weeks in a row, new stats reveal today.


Almost five times as many people are now dying of influenza or pneumonia than Covid-19, according to the latest data from the Office for National Statistics.


Deaths from flu are now exceeding deaths from coronavirus
Deaths from flu are now exceeding deaths from coronavirus
Thanks to astrazaneca vaccine.
 

LITTLEREDDOT

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Do we need masks outdoors? Covid-19 experts weigh in
Top experts now believe the disease is primarily airborne.

Top experts now believe the disease is primarily airborne.
PHOTO: EPA-EFE

Apr 19, 2021

WASHINGTON (AFP) - It is a familiar sight in some US cities like Washington, New York and San Francisco: people walking on the street, riding bikes or sitting in parks with their masks on even when they are far away from others.

Certain states, like Maine, have kept in place outdoor mask mandates for hiking trails and beaches.

So where does the evidence lie? And is there any harm in public health measurees that go beyond the science, or if people behave more cautiously than they need?
Scientists have learned a lot about Covid-19 since the pandemic began.

In terms of how it is transmitted, we now know surfaces are not a major vector, and heightened disinfection efforts are a misplaced use of time and resources.
Second, the top experts now believe the disease is primarily airborne.

That means it's mostly spread through fine respiratory particles that remain suspended in the air for some time - as opposed to larger droplets from coughing and sneezing that fall quickly to the ground.

This in turn makes outdoors much safer than indoors, said Dr Jose-Luis Jimenez, a leading aerosol scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder.
"Indoors are much more dangerous because the walls and the ceiling and the floor trap the air," particularly if there's low ventilation, he told AFP.
"Outdoors are much less risky because there is a lot more motion of air," and exhaled air rises, particularly in warmer weather.

But, he stressed, low risk does not mean no risk.

Just like you are bound to inhale some smoke outdoors if you're close to a smoker, there is a small chance of catching Covid-19 if you spend a prolonged time in close proximity to a carrier outdoors.

What are the odds of infection?
There have now been a number of studies that have attempted to quantify the risk of outdoor Covid-19 spread.
Last October, Chinese researchers published a paper in the journal Indoor Air that compiled information on 7,324 cases and included information about where the virus was caught.
Only one documented outbreak occurred outdoors, in a village in Shangqiu, Henan - where a 27-year-old man became infected after having a conversation outdoors with a carrier in January 2020.

More recently, the Irish Times sought information from government authorities on 232,164 cases of Covid-19 caught in the country until March 24.
In total, 262 involved outdoor transmission, representing just 0.1 per cent of the total.
It's possible even that estimate is high, since the government agency relied on unverified reports that said outdoor activities were involved - such as construction or sport - and these might not have accounted for the individuals involved congregating indoors too.
Dr Donald Milton, a professor at the University of Maryland and one of the pioneers in the field of aerosol science, advises people to avoid crowds outdoors, particularly if shouting is involved and the air is stagnant.
But he doesn't think you need your mask on at all times.
"When I go jogging in my neighbourhood, where the houses are separated by 10m or more and there are only a few people out walking dogs or kids playing in yards, I carry a mask with me," he said.
"I cannot run very far in warmer weather while wearing it. Then if I stop to chat with other people I can put it on. If I go walking with friends, I wear one."

Politicised issue
Mask wearing became a politicised issue in the United States early on in the pandemic, with some conservatives, spurred by former president Donald Trump, viewing them as an affront to their personal freedom.
Liberals were generally more likely to take the virus seriously, and also saw masks outdoors as a way to signal solidarity with their community in a time of crisis.
But Dr Amesh Adalja, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University, said it was now time to dial back outdoor mask mandates and adopt a more nuanced approach better aligned with the science.
"Because masks have become so infused with politics, they have become something where people go around and 'mask shame' other individuals, and I think that's counterproductive," he said.
"We want people, who are unvaccinated especially, to wear masks when they're in indoor situations when they cannot social distance."
What's more, measures that create the impression that the outdoors are risky tend to drive people indoors, which is much more dangerous, he added.
Some experts argue that the value of outdoor mask mandates is keeping the messaging simple enough for the public to understand - but Dr Adalja disagrees.
"I think that doesn't do anything but breach the trust between public health authorities and the public," he said, adding that non-experts are capable of reading medical journals and realising when the official messaging diverges from the evidence.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
I've said this before and I'll say it again... when it comes to Covid there are no "experts" simply because it is a new disease.

All we have is the existing data and this data shows that masks don't work and can actually make things worse.
 

capamerica

Alfrescian
Loyal
If Israel can do it, so can SG with a lower infection rate (would have been lower if not for those inbound travellers from India).
At least not have to wear masks outdoors.

Masks come off as Israel vaunts coronavirus victory
1 of 2
dummy.gif

Pedestrians walking along a boulevard in Tel Aviv after Israel rescinded the mandatory wearing of masks outdoors, on April 18, 2021.

Pedestrians walking along a boulevard in Tel Aviv after Israel rescinded the mandatory wearing of masks outdoors, on April 18, 2021.
PHOTO: REUTERS
View attachment 108444
Israel rescinded the mandatory wearing of face masks outdoors and fully reopened schools on April 18, 2021.
PHOTO: EPA-EFE

Apr 18, 2021

JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israelis stepped into the streets without masks on Sunday (April 18) for the first time in a year, a key milestone as the country vaccinates its way out of a coronavirus nightmare.
“It’s very strange but it’s very nice,” said Ms Eliana Gamulka, 26, after getting off a bus near the busy Jerusalem shopping boulevard of Jaffa Street and removing her face covering. “You can’t pretend that you don’t know anyone any more,” she smiled.
With over half the population fully vaccinated in one of the world’s fastest anti-Covid 19 inoculation campaigns, the health ministry announced on Thursday that masks would no longer be required in public outdoor spaces.
For Ms Gamulka, a project manager, the good news came at the perfect time: just two weeks before her wedding.
It will be “very nice to celebrate with everyone, now without masks,” she said. “The pictures will be great! I’m very relieved. We can start living again.”
The vaccination of close to five million people has sent Israel’s coronavirus caseload tumbling from some 10,000 new infections per day as recently as mid-January, to around 200 cases a day.

That has allowed the re-opening of schools, bars, restaurants and indoor gatherings – although masks are still required in indoor public spaces.
And even before Health Minister Yuli Edelstein’s announcement came into effect, punters in the popular bars of Jerusalem’s Mahane Yehuda market were mask-free and smiling on Thursday evening.
Yet on Sunday, office worker Ester Malka said she wasn’t quite ready to let down her guard.
“We’re allowed, but I’m still afraid, I got used to (wearing a mask),” she said. “I feel like it’s part of my life. We’ll see what happens when everyone has taken them off. If it goes well for a couple of months, then I’ll remove mine.”

Israel just months ago had the world’s highest infection rate, a coronavirus outbreak that left 6,300 people dead among 836,000 cases.
But the Jewish state sent its coronavirus caseload tumbling after striking a deal for a vast stock of Pfizer/BioNTech jabs.
In exchange, it agreed to pay above market price and share data it gathers on the recipients, using one of the world’s most sophisticated medical data systems.
Since December, some 53 per cent of Israel’s 9.3 million people have received both doses of the jab, including around four-fifths of the population aged over 20. As recently as January it was registering 10,000 cases per day.
But as the effects of mass vaccination kicked in, by March it was able to implement a gradual re-opening.
“There’s no better advertisement for Pfizer,” said Mr Shalom Yatzkan, a computer programmer who had been in quarantine after catching the virus.
“I was sick for three days, I had neck pains and felt weak,” he said as he walked through central Jerusalem. “I just hope the new variants don’t catch up with us.”
The situation in Israel is in stark contrast to the occupied West Bank and the blockaded Gaza Strip, where infection rates remain high and vaccinations are low.
Rights groups have urged Israel to supply vaccines to the 4.8 million Palestinians living there, but Israel says that falls to the the Palestinian Authority.
It has however vaccinated over 105,000 Palestinian workers who hold permits for employment in Israel and the settlements.
In Jerusalem, Ms Gamulka was enjoying the simple pleasure of new-found freedoms.
“It’s nice not to have something on your face any more,” she said.

Israel did it because they vaccinated over 50% of their population. Singapore not there yet, you can ask your minister why
 

laksaboy

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If wearing a mask is no longer mandatory... what will happen to these entrepreneurs? :biggrin:

Even vending machines that sell drinks and snacks are also selling masks now. :eek:

 

capamerica

Alfrescian
Loyal
I've said this before and I'll say it again... when it comes to Covid there are no "experts" simply because it is a new disease.

All we have is the existing data and this data shows that masks don't work and can actually make things worse.

Wrong

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/4...s-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus
By Nina Bai

Español | русский | 中文
Woman wearing a cloth face mask in a grocery store

Editor's Note: This story was updated on July 11 to include information on why valved masks do not block exhaled droplets.
As states reopen from stay-at-home orders, many, including California, are now requiring people to wear face coverings in most public spaces to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization now recommend cloth masks for the general public, but earlier in the pandemic, both organizations recommended just the opposite. These shifting guidelines may have sowed confusion among the public about the utility of masks.
But health experts say the evidence is clear that masks can help prevent the spread of COVID-19 and that the more people wearing masks, the better.
We talked to UC San Francisco epidemiologist George Rutherford, MD, and infectious disease specialist Peter Chin-Hong, MD, about the CDC’s reversal on mask-wearing, the current science on how masks work, and what to consider when choosing a mask.
Why did the CDC change its guidance on wearing masks?
The original CDC guidance partly was based on what was thought to be low disease prevalence earlier in the pandemic, said Chin-Hong.
“So, of course, you’re preaching that the juice isn’t really worth the squeeze to have the whole population wear masks in the beginning – but that was really a reflection of not having enough testing, anyway,” he said. “We were getting a false sense of security.”
Rutherford was more blunt. The legitimate concern that the limited supply of surgical masks and N95 respirators should be saved for health care workers should not have prevented more nuanced messaging about the benefits of masking. “We should have told people to wear cloth masks right off the bat,” he said.
Another factor “is that culturally, the U.S. wasn’t really prepared to wear masks,” unlike some countries in Asia where the practice is more common, said Chin-Hong. Even now, some Americans are choosing to ignore CDC guidance and local mandates on masks, a hesitation that Chin-Hong says is “foolhardy.”
What may have finally convinced the CDC to change its guidance in favor of masks were rising disease prevalence and a clearer understanding that both pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic transmission are possible – even common. Studies have found that viral load peaks in the days before symptoms begin and that speaking is enough to expel virus-carrying droplets.
“I think the biggest thing with COVID now that shapes all of this guidance on masks is that we can’t tell who’s infected,” said Chin-Hong. “You can’t look in a crowd and say, oh, that person should wear mask. There’s a lot of asymptomatic infection, so everybody has to wear a mask.”
What evidence do we have that wearing a mask is effective in preventing COVID-19?
There are several strands of evidence supporting the efficacy of masks.
One category of evidence comes from laboratory studies of respiratory droplets and the ability of various masks to block them. An experiment using high-speed video found that hundreds of droplets ranging from 20 to 500 micrometers were generated when saying a simple phrase, but that nearly all these droplets were blocked when the mouth was covered by a damp washcloth. Another study of people who had influenza or the common cold found that wearing a surgical mask significantly reduced the amount of these respiratory viruses emitted in droplets and aerosols.
But the strongest evidence in favor of masks come from studies of real-world scenarios. “The most important thing are the epidemiologic data,” said Rutherford. Because it would be unethical to assign people to not wear a mask during a pandemic, the epidemiological evidence has come from so-called “experiments of nature.”
A recent study published in Health Affairs, for example, compared the COVID-19 growth rate before and after mask mandates in 15 states and the District of Columbia. It found that mask mandates led to a slowdown in daily COVID-19 growth rate, which became more apparent over time. The first five days after a mandate, the daily growth rate slowed by 0.9 percentage-points compared to the five days prior to the mandate; at three weeks, the daily growth rate had slowed by 2 percentage-points.
Another study looked at coronavirus deaths across 198 countries and found that those with cultural norms or government policies favoring mask-wearing had lower death rates.
Two compelling case reports also suggest that masks can prevent transmission in high-risk scenarios, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford. In one case, a man flew from China to Toronto and subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. He had a dry cough and wore a mask on the flight, and all 25 people closest to him on the flight tested negative for COVID-19. In another case, in late May, two hair stylists in Missouri had close contact with 140 clients while sick with COVID-19. Everyone wore a mask and none of the clients tested positive.
Do masks protect the people wearing them or the people around them?
“I think there’s enough evidence to say that the best benefit is for people who have COVID-19 to protect them from giving COVID-19 to other people, but you’re still going to get a benefit from wearing a mask if you don’t have COVID-19,” said Chin-Hong.
Masks may be more effective as a “source control” because they can prevent larger expelled droplets from evaporating into smaller droplets that can travel farther.
Another factor to remember, noted Rutherford, is that you could still catch the virus through the membranes in your eyes, a risk that masking does not eliminate.
How many people need to wear masks to reduce community transmission?
“What you want is 100 percent of people to wear masks, but you’ll settle for 80 percent,” said Rutherford. In one simulation, researchers predicted that 80 percent of the population wearing masks would do more to reduce COVID-19 spread than a strict lockdown.
The latest forecast from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation suggests that 33,000 deaths could be avoided by October 1 if 95 percent of people wore masks in public.
Even if you live in a community where few people wear masks, you would still reduce your own chances of catching the virus by wearing one, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford.
Does the type of mask matter?
Studies have compared various mask materials, but for the general public, the most important consideration may be comfort. The best mask is one you can wear comfortably and consistently, said Chin-Hong. N95 respirators are only necessary in medical situations such as intubation. Surgical masks are generally more protective than cloth masks, and some people find them lighter and more comfortable to wear.
The bottom line is that any mask that covers the nose and mouth will be of benefit.
“The concept is risk reduction rather than absolute prevention,” said Chin-Hong. “You don’t throw up your hands if you think a mask is not 100 percent effective. That’s silly. Nobody’s taking a cholesterol medicine because they’re going to prevent a heart attack 100 percent of the time, but you’re reducing your risk substantially.”
However, both Rutherford and Chin-Hong cautioned against N95 masks with valves (commonly used in construction to prevent the inhalation of dust) because they do not protect those around you. These one-way valves close when the wearer breathes in, but open when the wearer breathes out, allowing unfiltered air and droplets to escape. Chin-Hong said that anyone wearing a valved mask would need to wear a surgical or cloth mask over it. "Alternatively, just wear a non-valved mask," he said.
San Francisco has specified that masks with valves do not comply with the city's face covering order.
If we’re practicing social distancing, do we still need to wear masks?
A mnemonic that Chin-Hong likes is the “Three W’s to ward off COVID-19:” wearing a mask, washing your hands, and watching your distance.
“But of the three, the most important thing is wearing a mask,” he said. Compared to wearing a mask, cleaning your iPhone or wiping down your groceries are “just distractors.” There’s little evidence that fomites (contaminated surfaces) are a major source of transmission, whereas there is a lot of evidence of transmission through inhaled droplets, said Chin-Hong.
“You should always wear masks and socially distance,” said Rutherford. “I would be hesitant to try to parse it apart. But, yes, I think mask wearing is more important.”
 

tobelightlight

Alfrescian
Loyal
Israel did it because they vaccinated over 50% of their population. Singapore not there yet, you can ask your minister why
So are u saying that sg govt intend to manipulate and brainwash the pple I to getting the vaccine so that 50% can be achieve and show the world that we are safe?
Disregard personal discretion if the person wants it or not? Just because there are pple who are deluded about mask, virus and vaccine, other pew are expected to follow this delusion?

To show the world we are safe is important, u want it or not is not important?
 

tanwahtiu

Alfrescian
Loyal
There is no data to say mask stops the spread.... so how?

Butt..... close the border and stop India spreader to Singapore do help contain the imported spread, right dumbrwit?



I've said this before and I'll say it again... when it comes to Covid there are no "experts" simply because it is a new disease.

All we have is the existing data and this data shows that masks don't work and can actually make things worse.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Wrong

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/4...s-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus
By Nina Bai

Español | русский | 中文
Woman wearing a cloth face mask in a grocery store

Editor's Note: This story was updated on July 11 to include information on why valved masks do not block exhaled droplets.
As states reopen from stay-at-home orders, many, including California, are now requiring people to wear face coverings in most public spaces to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization now recommend cloth masks for the general public, but earlier in the pandemic, both organizations recommended just the opposite. These shifting guidelines may have sowed confusion among the public about the utility of masks.
But health experts say the evidence is clear that masks can help prevent the spread of COVID-19 and that the more people wearing masks, the better.
We talked to UC San Francisco epidemiologist George Rutherford, MD, and infectious disease specialist Peter Chin-Hong, MD, about the CDC’s reversal on mask-wearing, the current science on how masks work, and what to consider when choosing a mask.
Why did the CDC change its guidance on wearing masks?
The original CDC guidance partly was based on what was thought to be low disease prevalence earlier in the pandemic, said Chin-Hong.
“So, of course, you’re preaching that the juice isn’t really worth the squeeze to have the whole population wear masks in the beginning – but that was really a reflection of not having enough testing, anyway,” he said. “We were getting a false sense of security.”
Rutherford was more blunt. The legitimate concern that the limited supply of surgical masks and N95 respirators should be saved for health care workers should not have prevented more nuanced messaging about the benefits of masking. “We should have told people to wear cloth masks right off the bat,” he said.
Another factor “is that culturally, the U.S. wasn’t really prepared to wear masks,” unlike some countries in Asia where the practice is more common, said Chin-Hong. Even now, some Americans are choosing to ignore CDC guidance and local mandates on masks, a hesitation that Chin-Hong says is “foolhardy.”
What may have finally convinced the CDC to change its guidance in favor of masks were rising disease prevalence and a clearer understanding that both pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic transmission are possible – even common. Studies have found that viral load peaks in the days before symptoms begin and that speaking is enough to expel virus-carrying droplets.
“I think the biggest thing with COVID now that shapes all of this guidance on masks is that we can’t tell who’s infected,” said Chin-Hong. “You can’t look in a crowd and say, oh, that person should wear mask. There’s a lot of asymptomatic infection, so everybody has to wear a mask.”
What evidence do we have that wearing a mask is effective in preventing COVID-19?
There are several strands of evidence supporting the efficacy of masks.
One category of evidence comes from laboratory studies of respiratory droplets and the ability of various masks to block them. An experiment using high-speed video found that hundreds of droplets ranging from 20 to 500 micrometers were generated when saying a simple phrase, but that nearly all these droplets were blocked when the mouth was covered by a damp washcloth. Another study of people who had influenza or the common cold found that wearing a surgical mask significantly reduced the amount of these respiratory viruses emitted in droplets and aerosols.
But the strongest evidence in favor of masks come from studies of real-world scenarios. “The most important thing are the epidemiologic data,” said Rutherford. Because it would be unethical to assign people to not wear a mask during a pandemic, the epidemiological evidence has come from so-called “experiments of nature.”
A recent study published in Health Affairs, for example, compared the COVID-19 growth rate before and after mask mandates in 15 states and the District of Columbia. It found that mask mandates led to a slowdown in daily COVID-19 growth rate, which became more apparent over time. The first five days after a mandate, the daily growth rate slowed by 0.9 percentage-points compared to the five days prior to the mandate; at three weeks, the daily growth rate had slowed by 2 percentage-points.
Another study looked at coronavirus deaths across 198 countries and found that those with cultural norms or government policies favoring mask-wearing had lower death rates.
Two compelling case reports also suggest that masks can prevent transmission in high-risk scenarios, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford. In one case, a man flew from China to Toronto and subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. He had a dry cough and wore a mask on the flight, and all 25 people closest to him on the flight tested negative for COVID-19. In another case, in late May, two hair stylists in Missouri had close contact with 140 clients while sick with COVID-19. Everyone wore a mask and none of the clients tested positive.
Do masks protect the people wearing them or the people around them?
“I think there’s enough evidence to say that the best benefit is for people who have COVID-19 to protect them from giving COVID-19 to other people, but you’re still going to get a benefit from wearing a mask if you don’t have COVID-19,” said Chin-Hong.
Masks may be more effective as a “source control” because they can prevent larger expelled droplets from evaporating into smaller droplets that can travel farther.
Another factor to remember, noted Rutherford, is that you could still catch the virus through the membranes in your eyes, a risk that masking does not eliminate.
How many people need to wear masks to reduce community transmission?
“What you want is 100 percent of people to wear masks, but you’ll settle for 80 percent,” said Rutherford. In one simulation, researchers predicted that 80 percent of the population wearing masks would do more to reduce COVID-19 spread than a strict lockdown.
The latest forecast from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation suggests that 33,000 deaths could be avoided by October 1 if 95 percent of people wore masks in public.
Even if you live in a community where few people wear masks, you would still reduce your own chances of catching the virus by wearing one, said Chin-Hong and Rutherford.
Does the type of mask matter?
Studies have compared various mask materials, but for the general public, the most important consideration may be comfort. The best mask is one you can wear comfortably and consistently, said Chin-Hong. N95 respirators are only necessary in medical situations such as intubation. Surgical masks are generally more protective than cloth masks, and some people find them lighter and more comfortable to wear.
The bottom line is that any mask that covers the nose and mouth will be of benefit.
“The concept is risk reduction rather than absolute prevention,” said Chin-Hong. “You don’t throw up your hands if you think a mask is not 100 percent effective. That’s silly. Nobody’s taking a cholesterol medicine because they’re going to prevent a heart attack 100 percent of the time, but you’re reducing your risk substantially.”
However, both Rutherford and Chin-Hong cautioned against N95 masks with valves (commonly used in construction to prevent the inhalation of dust) because they do not protect those around you. These one-way valves close when the wearer breathes in, but open when the wearer breathes out, allowing unfiltered air and droplets to escape. Chin-Hong said that anyone wearing a valved mask would need to wear a surgical or cloth mask over it. "Alternatively, just wear a non-valved mask," he said.
San Francisco has specified that masks with valves do not comply with the city's face covering order.
If we’re practicing social distancing, do we still need to wear masks?
A mnemonic that Chin-Hong likes is the “Three W’s to ward off COVID-19:” wearing a mask, washing your hands, and watching your distance.
“But of the three, the most important thing is wearing a mask,” he said. Compared to wearing a mask, cleaning your iPhone or wiping down your groceries are “just distractors.” There’s little evidence that fomites (contaminated surfaces) are a major source of transmission, whereas there is a lot of evidence of transmission through inhaled droplets, said Chin-Hong.
“You should always wear masks and socially distance,” said Rutherford. “I would be hesitant to try to parse it apart. But, yes, I think mask wearing is more important.”

Plenty of these sorts of airy, fairy op eds to support a political stance but the fact of the matter is that data from the ground shows absolutely no difference and in fact often makes things worse.

++++++


After nine months, we still know masks don’t work
image-8.png

ANALYSIS
BY LEN CABRERA
After nine months, we still know masks don’t work
Recently we highlighted an article by UF researchers that showed asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread of COVID-19 in households is essentially zero (0.7 ± 4.2 percent secondary attack rate). This result is important because potential asymptomatic spread was the basis for mask mandates across the country. Despite all the models and theories used to support non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI), real-world evidence continues to show that these NPIs (mask mandates, lockdowns, etc.) are not effective.
Prior to COVID-19, the CDC’s Community Mitigation Guidelines to Prevent Pandemic Influenza (2017) said, “CDC does not routinely recommend the use of face masks by well persons in the home or other community settings as a means of avoiding infection” (p15). The document specifically talked about disposable surgical, medical, or dental procedure masks, not random cloth face masks. The document said that persons at high risk of complications (of flu) or who are caring for ill family members should wear masks but said, “little evidence supports the use of face masks by well persons in community settings” (p14).
In a January 28, 2020 press conference, Dr. Anthony Fauci said, “In all the history of respiratory-borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there’s a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.”
Even as late as April 6, the WHO’s guidelines said members of the general public “only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19” or “if you are coughing or sneezing.”
But COVID-19 was a “novel” (new) virus, so public health agencies tossed out all previous guidance on dealing with viruses. The WHO guidelines changed on June 5: “governments should encourage the general public to wear masks in specific situations and settings as part of a comprehensive approach to suppress SARS-CoV-2 transmission.” The stated reason for the change in guidance was that potential asymptomatic transmission from the new virus required universal mask mandates to maybe slow the spread.
Bureaucracies move slowly, even when propagating a narrative, so the June 5 WHO guidance also said:
  • “There is limited evidence that wearing a medical mask by healthy individuals in households… or among attendees of mass gatherings may be beneficial as a measure preventing transmission.”
  • “cluster randomized controlled trials… showed no impact on risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
  • “There is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.”
  • “At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.”
Early evidence already suggested there was not much asymptomatic spread from COVID-19. In a press conference in Geneva (video posted by Bloomberg on June 8), Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s Emerging Diseases and Zoonosis Unit, was asked, “What proportion of asymptomatic people actually transmit?” (1:15 in video)
Her answer: “We have a number of reports from countries that are doing very detailed contact tracing. They’re following asymptomatic cases. They’re following contacts, and they’re not finding secondary transmission onward. It’s very rare” (1:33 in video). “It still appears to be rare that an asymptomatic individual actually transmits onward” (2:09 in video).
That information would undermine the new direction in mask policy, so Dr. Anthony Fauci went on Good Morning America to claim that Dr. Van Kerkhove’s statement was false “because there’s no evidence to indicate that’s the case”; he went on to claim that epidemiological studies show asymptomatic people can transmit SARS-CoV-2 “even when they are without symptoms.” He didn’t say if those studies looked at actual data or were based on models, like the studies that claim masks work by assuming they reduce transmissibility by 50%. (Read all about masks in my June 30 review of medical literature.)
Dr. Van Kerkhove quickly retracted her statement, saying, “I was responding to a question at the press conference. I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that. I was just trying to articulate what we know.” That sums up the COVID era: “what we know” often tends to conflict with what we’re told.
That was months ago, and now we have even more data on this “novel” coronavirus. Now we know asymptomatic spread is rare, thanks to UF researchers and others. We also know that PCR tests are counter-productive because they are too sensitive and result in many false positives (even acknowledged by The Spectator and The New York Times). The tests are so bad that a Portuguese court said people cannot be quarantined only because of a positive PCR test.
We also know the mortality rate is very low for a vast majority of the population. Even the most vulnerable 70+ age group has close to a 95% chance of surviving COVID-19. The CDC’s age-stratified “current best estimate” for the infection fatality rate is:
  • 0-19 years: 0.003%
  • 20-49 years: 0.02%
  • 50-69 years: 0.5%
  • 70+ years: 5.4%
Yet governors double down on ineffective and unnecessary NPIs, and the Bill of Rights continues to be superseded by emergency orders. Scott Morefield wrote in TownHall about a Rational Ground analysis showing that masks do not work to stop the spread of COVID-19. The analysis compared states with and without mask mandates and found higher average cases per 100,000 population in states with mask mandates.
Many will claim to find fault with such a result because the aggregate analysis lacks nuance. They’ll argue that the states with mask mandates are geographically different, or they have more dense populations, or they already had higher infection rates, or (the favorite unverifiable claim) cases in those states would have been even higher without the masks. To preempt those arguments, the Rational Ground analysis also looked at individual counties within a single state: Florida.
22 of Florida’s 67 counties have a mask mandate. Between May 1 and December 15, there is essentially no difference in population-adjusted cases between masked and unmasked counties: 23 vs 22 cases per 100,000 population. (NOTE: For areas with a mask mandate, the study started counting cases 14 days after the mandate went into effect.)
Further, of the 20 counties that implemented a mask mandate after May 1 (so we have data with and without a mandate), only 3 had a reduction in average daily cases. (We used the same 14-day window after the mandate to give it time to have an effect.) When restricting the analysis to these 20 counties, it’s no longer a wash. Average cases per 100,000 population per day are higher with the mandate than without: 22 vs. 15.
Let’s consider two neighboring counties: Alachua (with a mask mandate since May 4) and Marion (with no mandate). Using cases for May 18 to December 15 (allowing 14 days for the Alachua mandate to have an effect on cases), the average cases per 100,000 population per day were 24 for Alachua and 19 for Marion. During that period of time, daily cases per 100,000 population in Alachua County exceeded those in Marion County for 137 of the 212 days (65%). (NOTE: Updating the study period from May 18 to January 8, using the January 9, 2021 case line data, Alachua County still leads Marion County in average daily cases per 100,000 population: 27 to 23.)
Alachua-Marion-Cases.jpg

This result isn’t unique. Ian Miller posts charts on RationalGround.com and Twitter (@ianmSC). He has a graph showing that daily cases for Florida counties without mask mandates have been lower than counties with mandates since October 15 (Florida moved to Phase 3 reopening on September 25).
image-8.png

His graphs often show that cases and hospitalizations are similar between neighboring states, regardless of masking orders.
Here’s another example of charts showing similar daily cases by region.
This data isn’t surprising to people who paid attention at the start of the pandemic when, seemingly overnight, all public health organizations changed long-standing positions on mask use. The data clearly show that NPIs, especially mask mandates, do not work. The fact that politicians continue to push them shows that they rely on ignorance and compliance to abuse their authority.
 
Top