Kennita,
Have you reviewed the evidence against the effectiveness of masks at
https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/?
These points, for instance:
There is increasing evidence that the novel coronavirus is transmitted, at
least in indoor settings, not only by droplets but also by smaller aerosols.
However, due to their large pore size and poor fit, most masks cannot filter
out aerosols (see video analysis below): over 90% of aerosols penetrate or
bypass the mask and fill a medium-sized room within minutes.
The WHO admitted to the BBC that its June 2020 mask policy update was due not
to new evidence but “political lobbying”: “We had been told by various sources
WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended
them due to political lobbying. This point was put to WHO who did not deny.”
(D. Cohen, BBC Medical Corresponent).
To date, the only randomized controlled trial (RCT) on face masks against
SARS-CoV-2 infection in a community setting found no statistically significant
benefit (see above). However, three major journals refused to publish this
study, delaying its publication by several months.
An analysis by the US CDC found that 85% of people infected with the new
coronavirus reported wearing a mask “always” (70.6%) or “often” (14.4%).
Compared to the control group of uninfected people, always wearing a mask did
not reduce the risk of infection.
Researchers from the University of Minnesota found that the infectious dose of
SARS-CoV-2 is just 300 virions (virus particles), whereas a single minute of
normal speaking may generate more than 750,000 virions, making face masks
unlikely to prevent an infection.
In the US state of Kansas, the 90 counties without mask mandates had lower
coronavirus infection rates than the 15 counties with mask mandates. To hide
this fact, the Kansas health department tried to manipulate the official
statistics and data presentation.
Contrary to common belief, studies in hospitals found that the wearing of a
medical mask by surgeons during operations didn’t reduce post-operative
bacterial wound infections in patients.
During the notorious 1918 influenza pandemic, the use of face masks among the
general population was widespread and in some places mandatory, but they made
no difference.
The initially low coronavirus infection rate in some Asian countries was not
due to masks, but due to very rapid border controls. For instance, Japan,
despite its widespread use of face masks, had experienced its most recent
influenza epidemic just one year prior to the covid pandemic.
Early in the pandemic, the advocacy group “masks4all” argued that Czechia had
few infections thanks to the early use of masks. In reality, the coronavirus
simply hadn’t engulfed Eastern Europe yet; a few months later, Czechia had one
of the highest infection rates in the world.
I would love to see some honest investigative journalism weighing these
various competing claims without an agenda, but sadly most mainstream media
outlets seem more interested in just beating the drum for people to wear masks,
than actually looking at the science and considering opposing points of view.
Presenting evidence for and against and inviting readers to make up their own
minds.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
On Sep 1, 2021, at 2:07 AM, Kennita Watson wrote:
Please show this to friends and others who think masks don’t work, or
otherwise pooh-pooh them.
https://www.kxan.com/news/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-here-are-49-scientific-studies-that-explain-why-they-do/
BTW, being fully vaccinated doesn’t make masks unnecessary: “… as mutations
emerge, masking will be even more important”.
Live long and prosper - Kennita
