Masks

Democrats love to claim they “follow the SCIENCE” … but the recent rash of insane and unconstitutional mask mandates proves they do not. N.b., the emphases below are mine.

From The Spectator

Overall, there is a troubling lack of robust evidence on face masks and COVID-19. There have only been three community trials during the current pandemic comparing the use of masks with various alternatives — one in Guinea-Bissau, one in India and this latest trial in Denmark.

The low number of studies into the effect different interventions have on the spread of COVID-19 — a subject of global importance — suggests there is a total lack of interest from governments in pursuing evidence-based medicine. And this starkly contrasts with the huge sums they have spent on ‘boutique relations’ consultants advising the government.

The only trials which have shown masks to be effective at stopping airborne diseases have been ‘observational studies’ — which observe the people who ordinarily use masks, rather than attempting to create a randomized control group. These trials include six studies carried out in the Far East during the SARS CoV-1 outbreak of 2003, which showed that masks can work, especially when they are used by healthcare workers and patients alongside hand-washing.

The most recent study – ‘Danmask-19 trial’ – was conducted in the spring with over 3,000 6024 (sorry!) randomized participants, about half of whom were given disposable surgical face masks, which they were told to change after eight hours of use. After one month, the 4862 people who had completed the study were tested for coronavirus. There was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks properly, those who were more sloppy about wearing the masks, and those who did not wear masks at all. About two percent of each group got infected with COVID-19.

Nine other trials looking at the efficacy of masks and flu (two looking at healthcare workers and seven at community transmission) have found that masks make little or no difference to whether you get influenza or not.

2 Comments

Filed under Loose Pollen

2 responses to “Masks

  1. Paul O'Connor

    Hi
    The Spectator got their numbers wrong! Here is an extract from the “Annals
    of Internal Medicine” with the correct numbers: “A total of 17258 Danish citizens responded to recruitment, and 6024… fulfilled eligibility criteria… A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to… wear face masks, and 2994 were assigned not to wear face masks; 4862 participants (80.7%) completed the study.”

    Like

    • chrissythehyphenated

      Thanks for the correction. I read it wrong too! The bigger patient pool makes the results even more significant, right?

      Like