CDC release study on masks during covid. Efficacy is 0.5-1.9 percent.

[montado]

At what point does the viral load render masks ineffective?

Never. There is always someone at the marginal range of infection who would have escaped if the person infecting them had worn a mask.

Wear a mask.

Tell me to mask harder, this is what we really need. Mask harder to fight delta.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/randal ... he-fearful

Vaccine passports a comfort to the fearful… isn’t that just about all the pandemic policy, masks included?

Get vaccinated, live normal. Would be nice.

[montado]

I wanted to dive deeper into that Bangladesh study cpncrunch. Also wanted to be careful and not just dismiss it, so I took the time to dive in and read the whole thing.

Here is the figure with the difference from the control group. 1 percent difference in how many cases. Guess that data is inline with what the cdc says. Mask policy is about 0.5 to 1.9 percent effective. Here is the table:

50EEAFC5-42D4-4BC1-86C2-46450F018086.jpeg (194.17 KiB) Viewed 2889 times

The study also pointed out how cloth masks were noticeable in being more that half as effective as surgical masks.

Why is it we don’t wear N95s as policy. If we were actually interested in making an impact with masks (like a better than 1 percent impact), don’t you think we would wear a mask with some science behind it? Why so much confidence in cloth masks?

All things the same, in Canada if we had no mask policy what would be the difference in cases? About 16000 cases since the beginning of the pandemic? Of course those who want to mask could mask. Or we could use a more targeted approach. Why are kids in schools masking? This is not the only way.

It’s pathetic really how these studies come out that show very little difference, yet they draw these conclusions as if masks are incredible and working so great. I don’t know about you, but saying “we have 10k covid cases, but if we didn’t wear masks we would have 10500 cases” is not a great argument to mandate masks.

The vaccines on the other hand, when you look at the ratios of who’s ending up in hospital, it’s a clear path to success. It’s a shame vaccinated people are convinced masks should be worn. At the very least should be optional for the vaccinated… or maybe just everyone, because you know we are like 80 percent vaccinated and vaccine certificates policy and masks are just as dumb as ever at this point. Am I the only one with covid fatigue?

[kgb531]

Recognizing you lack both the requisite educational background and mental capacity to understand the subject matter should have been your first thought but shockingly, wasn't.
Having excess time and an internet connection to "dive deep" doesn't work if you can't already meet the above prerequisites.

I wanted to dive deeper into that Bangladesh study cpncrunch. Also wanted to be careful and not just dismiss it, so I took the time to dive in and read the whole thing.

Here is the figure with the difference from the control group. 1 percent difference in how many cases. Guess that data is inline with what the cdc says. Mask policy is about 0.5 to 1.9 percent effective. Here is the table:
50EEAFC5-42D4-4BC1-86C2-46450F018086.jpeg

The study also pointed out how cloth masks were noticeable in being more that half as effective as surgical masks.

Why is it we don’t wear N95s as policy. If we were actually interested in making an impact with masks (like a better than 1 percent impact), don’t you think we would wear a mask with some science behind it? Why so much confidence in cloth masks?

All things the same, in Canada if we had no mask policy what would be the difference in cases? About 16000 cases since the beginning of the pandemic? Of course those who want to mask could mask. Or we could use a more targeted approach. Why are kids in schools masking? This is not the only way.

It’s pathetic really how these studies come out that show very little difference, yet they draw these conclusions as if masks are incredible and working so great. I don’t know about you, but saying “we have 10k covid cases, but if we didn’t wear masks we would have 10500 cases” is not a great argument to mandate masks.

The vaccines on the other hand, when you look at the ratios of who’s ending up in hospital, it’s a clear path to success. It’s a shame vaccinated people are convinced masks should be worn. At the very least should be optional for the vaccinated… or maybe just everyone, because you know we are like 80 percent vaccinated and vaccine certificates policy and masks are just as dumb as ever at this point. Am I the only one with covid fatigue?

[dialdriver]

Here is the figure with the difference from the control group. 1 percent difference in how many cases. Guess that data is inline with what the cdc says. Mask policy is about 0.5 to 1.9 percent effective.

Once again montado is citing references to support his argument, that don't in fact support his argument.

From the CDC website:

"Upwards of 80% blockage has been achieved in human experiments that have measured blocking of all respiratory droplets, with cloth masks in some studies performing on par with surgical masks as barriers for source control".

"An investigation of a high-exposure event, in which 2 symptomatically ill hair stylists interacted for an average of 15 minutes with each of 139 clients during an 8-day period, found that none of the 67 clients who subsequently consented to an interview and testing developed infection. The stylists and all clients universally wore masks in the salon as required by local ordinance and company policy at the time.

In a study of 124 Beijing households with > 1 laboratory-confirmed case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, mask use by the index patient and family contacts before the index patient developed symptoms reduced secondary transmission within the households by 79%.
A retrospective case-control study from Thailand documented that, among more than 1,000 persons interviewed as part of contact tracing investigations, those who reported having always worn a mask during high-risk exposures experienced a greater than 70% reduced risk of acquiring infection compared with persons who did not wear masks under these circumstances.

A study of an outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, an environment notable for congregate living quarters and close working environments, found that use of face coverings on-board was associated with a 70% reduced risk.

Investigations involving infected passengers aboard flights longer than 10 hours strongly suggest that masking prevented in-flight transmissions, as demonstrated by the absence of infection developing in other passengers and crew in the 14 days following exposure.

At least ten studies have confirmed the benefit of universal masking in community level analyses: in a unified hospital system, a German city, two U.S. states, a panel of 15 U.S. states and Washington, D.C., as well as both Canada and the U.S. nationally. Each analysis demonstrated that, following directives from organizational and political leadership for universal masking, new infections fell significantly. Two of these studies and an additional analysis of data from 200 countries that included the U.S.51 also demonstrated reductions in mortality. Another 10-site study showed reductions in hospitalization growth rates following mask mandate implementation. A separate series of cross-sectional surveys in the U.S. suggested that a 10% increase in self-reported mask wearing tripled the likelihood of stopping community transmission.53 An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product".

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... -cov2.html

['97 Tercel]

Basically masks are like airport security...they do a little but are mostly there for optics.

[montado]

Everyone’s evidence that masks need to be worn points to studies where the control group has 1 percent more cases of covid? This is the best you guys got?

Everyone here loves masks because in Canada if we didn’t have mandatory masks, out of our 1.6 million cases we may have have prevented about 15k cases with masks. Such a small impact… probably less impact with delta because we know it’s more aerosolized.

You guys need to stop going by what “you feel” and start reading data. That’s great what “you believe” about masks, the science says masks are not very effective.

[montado]

An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product".

Sounds like a religious statement not a scientific statement. If people believe in masks we can keep the economy going! "

I don’t disagree with that, if you tell people they are safe to work if they wear a mask they might keep working. But “belief that you are safe” is not data. Also telling people if we don’t wear masks we will “have to lockdown”. We can “have to lockdown” for any reasons the government wants to say. Big daddy government decides.

You guys aren’t objective thinkers. You are believers. Religious thinkers. Here’s another one that will sound familiar to you, “if you murder you will have to go to hell”. Same as “if we don’t mask we will have to lockdown”

If your religion is mask wearing, that’s great for you, but religious thinking is not data driven it’s belief driven.

If people did any critical thinking and stopped politicizing covid policy, we could get beyond the smoke and mirrors and move on like Norway. Maybe you don’t need lockdowns or masks.

[photofly]

When you have three hundred people trying to exit a burning airliner, you need one critical thinker and two hundred and ninety nine people to shut up and do exactly as they’re told.

[dialdriver]

An economic analysis using U.S. data found that, given these effects, increasing universal masking by 15% could prevent the need for lockdowns and reduce associated losses of up to $1 trillion or about 5% of gross domestic product".

Sounds like a religious statement not a scientific statement. If people believe in masks we can keep the economy going! "

I don’t disagree with that, if you tell people they are safe to work if they wear a mask they might keep working. But “belief that you are safe” is not data. Also telling people if we don’t wear masks we will “have to lockdown”. We can “have to lockdown” for any reasons the government wants to say. Big daddy government decides.

You guys aren’t objective thinkers. You are believers. Religious thinkers. Here’s another one that will sound familiar to you, “if you murder you will have to go to hell”. Same as “if we don’t mask we will have to lockdown”

If your religion is mask wearing, that’s great for you, but religious thinking is not data driven it’s belief driven.

If people did any critical thinking and stopped politicizing covid policy, we could get beyond the smoke and mirrors and move on like Norway. Maybe you don’t need lockdowns or masks.

I cited the source you referenced in your post. Now you are faulting it and expecting people to take you seriously.

[montado]

Dialdriver it’s clear masks are your religion. I can appreciate that and respect your religious beliefs. I’m happy to let you be. Just don’t try to force your religion on other people.

That quote has nothing to do with the efficacy of masks and everything to do with the perception of masks. I already claimed that since the beginning, that telling people to wear masks was a way to make people believe they are safer. This is not something I would argue different, I already accepted that’s a fact. But it has nothing to do with how effective masks are at preventing the spread of an aerosol spreading disease. Belief that masks stop covid means nothing. Factual evidence on efficacy is science, not people’s perceptions. Very little data to support cloth masks have and substantial impact on cases. It looks like this when you read the research in masks:

Cloth masks might actually be worse than no mask at all
Surgical masks very little efficacy with blocking aerosols.
N95 shows effective when used correctly, n95 should be the standard if we wanted to prevent covid spread with masks.
Respirator very effective at reducing transmission, not really a feasible solution for general public use everywhere.

This is not surprising is it? Anyone here wear company issued cloth masks . . At the very least use a disposable mask and change out every couple hours.

[dialdriver]

Dialdriver it’s clear masks are your religion. I can appreciate that and respect your religious beliefs. I’m happy to let you be. Just don’t try to force your religion on other people.

That quote has nothing to do with the efficacy of masks and everything to do with the perception of masks. I already claimed that since the beginning, that telling people to wear masks was a way to make people believe they are safer. This is not something I would argue different, I already accepted that’s a fact. But it has nothing to do with how effective masks are at preventing the spread of an aerosol spreading disease. Belief that masks stop covid means nothing. Factual evidence on efficacy is science, not people’s perceptions. Very little data to support cloth masks have and substantial impact on cases. It looks like this when you read the research in masks:

Cloth masks might actually be worse than no mask at all
Surgical masks very little efficacy with blocking aerosols.
N95 shows effective when used correctly, n95 should be the standard if we wanted to prevent covid spread with masks.
Respirator very effective at reducing transmission, not really a feasible solution for general public use everywhere.

This is not surprising is it?

Then why did you source the CDC to make your point?

[montado]

The cdc data shows masks are not very effective. They draw conclusions that masks are effective because they can say whatever they want. Dr fisman said covid deaths in kids is the same as flu deaths, if 70 percent of kids get covid this fall. His conclusion was that we are not doing enough to stop covid based on that data. I looked at the same data and had a different conclusion, and that was if he thinks we are not doing enough to stop covid in kids, why did he not think we were also not doing enough to stop the flu?

It’s funny how we can all look at the same data and make our own conclusions.

So I invite you to not read the experts conclusions but look at the data and draw you own. For example Bangladesh:

E41DCEE1-B7F6-4EAB-BE75-BEE517962702.jpeg (230.06 KiB) Viewed 4382 times

Here is the raw data. The control group had 1 percent more covid cases than the mask group. Does that result tell you masks are highly effective.

We can read the same study, and make different conclusions. I’m going to say a 1 percent difference shows masks were not very effective. We are all masking for 1 percent difference?

If vaccines prevented 1 percent of covid cases or lower icu by 1 percent, would you say wow the vaccine is very effective? would you support a mandatory vaccine if it was 1 percent effective? Why would you support mandatory masks for something so ineffective?

I support optional masking for those who feel safer, but that data doesn’t support masking being highly effective so no I don’t support mandatory mask policy.

[montado]

Here is another one for you. Here is an expert, look at the data. His last tweet is his conclusion, but maybe come up with your own conclusion.

4EB66C95-FB54-42AE-A2E3-885D0C52AA49.jpeg (650.97 KiB) Viewed 4366 times

933C6633-3EE4-41DD-92D1-A6674B446132.jpeg (652.35 KiB) Viewed 4366 times

45CD93AF-18BA-45EF-AE04-320ECF283D23.jpeg (486.55 KiB) Viewed 4366 times

His conclusion is that the data shows we are selfish if we just accept these deaths… how did he come up with this conclusion when flu deaths are about on par with these figures?

Again, two people can look at the same data and make different conclusions. I just can’t figure out why he was inconsistent. After I called him out on that he decided to step down. Hmmm. I take responsibility for fisman leaving the panel. His pay from the teachers union was not enough to make him keep drawing on these ridiculous conclusions. He could no longer live with his crazy inconsistency and people were calling him out for it.

[CpnCrunch]

We can read the same study, and make different conclusions. I’m going to say a 1 percent difference shows masks were not very effective. We are all masking for 1 percent difference?

If vaccines prevented 1 percent of covid cases or lower icu by 1 percent, would you say wow the vaccine is very effective? would you support a mandatory vaccine if it was 1 percent effective? Why would you support mandatory masks for something so ineffective?

I support optional masking for those who feel safer, but that data doesn’t support masking being highly effective so no I don’t support mandatory mask policy.

Oh god, you can't do something as simple as read a simple study without cherry-picking it, can you? The reduction in covid was 11.2%. What you're looking at are the figures for "covid like symptoms" which includes basically any kind of fever or bad cold.

[montado]

We can read the same study, and make different conclusions. I’m going to say a 1 percent difference shows masks were not very effective. We are all masking for 1 percent difference?

If vaccines prevented 1 percent of covid cases or lower icu by 1 percent, would you say wow the vaccine is very effective? would you support a mandatory vaccine if it was 1 percent effective? Why would you support mandatory masks for something so ineffective?

I support optional masking for those who feel safer, but that data doesn’t support masking being highly effective so no I don’t support mandatory mask policy.

Oh god, you can't do something as simple as read a simple study without cherry-picking it, can you? The reduction in covid was 11.2%. What you're looking at are the figures for "covid like symptoms" which includes basically any kind of fever or bad cold.

That was the study, the study was not to do with covid cases. I cherry picked nothing. I looked at the raw data.

The study linked surgical masks with an 11% drop in risk, compared with a 5% drop for cloth.

Funny they come up with this magic math to sound nice. Fact is masks have about a 1 percent effect according to the Bangladesh and cdc study.

[dialdriver]

The cdc data shows masks are not very effective. They draw conclusions that masks are effective because they can say whatever they want. Dr fisman said covid deaths in kids is the same as flu deaths, if 70 percent of kids get covid this fall. His conclusion was that we are not doing enough to stop covid based on that data. I looked at the same data and had a different conclusion, and that was if he thinks we are not doing enough to stop covid in kids, why did he not think we were also not doing enough to stop the flu?

It’s funny how we can all look at the same data and make our own conclusions.

So I invite you to not read the experts conclusions but look at the data and draw you own. For example Bangladesh:
E41DCEE1-B7F6-4EAB-BE75-BEE517962702.jpeg
Here is the raw data. The control group had 1 percent more covid cases than the mask group. Does that result tell you masks are highly effective.

We can read the same study, and make different conclusions. I’m going to say a 1 percent difference shows masks were not very effective. We are all masking for 1 percent difference?

If vaccines prevented 1 percent of covid cases or lower icu by 1 percent, would you say wow the vaccine is very effective? would you support a mandatory vaccine if it was 1 percent effective? Why would you support mandatory masks for something so ineffective?

I support optional masking for those who feel safer, but that data doesn’t support masking being highly effective so no I don’t support mandatory mask policy.

The CDC data shows masks to be highly effective in reduction of Covid deaths. They cite several studies

You started this whole thread saying masks are only 1.9% effective. That is a misrepresentation of the study findings.

The study found that 100 days after a mask mandate, death growth rates fell from 2.8% to .9% - a 1.9 percentage rate reduction - almost a 70% improvement!

See Table 1 in the study you posted when starting this thread.

Every study you source supports masks.

[montado]

How to you arrive at 70 percent less deaths when the control group in Bangladesh had 1 percent more covid than the test group? That sounds outrageous. Those are vastly different numbers.

[dialdriver]

How to you arrive at 70 percent less deaths when the control group in Bangladesh had 1 percent more covid than the test group? That sounds outrageous. Those are vastly different numbers.

You started this thread citing a CDC study that supports wearing of masks while saying it doesn't, because you made a basic math error.

[montado]

How to you arrive at 70 percent less deaths when the control group in Bangladesh had 1 percent more covid than the test group? That sounds outrageous. Those are vastly different numbers.

You started this thread citing a CDC study that supports wearing of masks while saying it doesn't, because you made a basic math error.

So your stance, is that without mask policy we would have 70 percent more deaths in Canada. Based on the cdc study and what happened in Bangladesh where there was 1 percent less covid symptoms present with masking? In other words you think masks have saved 19k lives in Canada based on this data?

Just trying to figure out how deep your religious roots are growing in the sand.

[dialdriver]

How to you arrive at 70 percent less deaths when the control group in Bangladesh had 1 percent more covid than the test group? That sounds outrageous. Those are vastly different numbers.

You started this thread citing a CDC study that supports wearing of masks while saying it doesn't, because you made a basic math error.

So your stance, is that without mask policy we would have 70 percent more deaths in Canada. Based on the cdc study and what happened in Bangladesh where there was 1 percent less covid symptoms present with masking? In other words you think masks have saved 19k lives in Canada based on this data?

Just trying to figure out how deep your religious roots are growing in the sand.

An improvement in the death rate from 0.9% to 2.8% is around a 311% improvement, not 70%.

My stance is your math is incorrect. Then you post studies supporting masks claiming they don't support masks. When confronted, you respond with more errors, embellished with personal attacks.

The Bangladesh study you cite concludes this:

"Face masks protect against COVID-19. That’s the conclusion of a gold-standard clinical trial in Bangladesh, which backs up the findings of hundreds of previous observational and laboratory studies".

Here is a link to an article on your study titled:

Face masks for COVID pass their largest test yet

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y

[montado]

Dial driver I have a simple question for you.

Canada has had 27k covid deaths and for the vast majority of the pandemic we have had mask mandates across the country.

So the question is: based on your interpretation of the data in these mask studies, how many more covid deaths would Canada have this entire pandemic had we had zero mask mandates nationally?

Just curious how to apply your math. No need to over think it just give a range or a ballpark.

[WellThatAgedWell]

An improvement in the death rate from 0.9% to 2.8% is around a 311% improvement, not 70%.

My stance is your math is incorrect. Then you post studies supporting masks claiming they don't support masks. When confronted, you respond with more errors, embellished with personal attacks.

The Bangladesh study you cite concludes this:

"Face masks protect against COVID-19. That’s the conclusion of a gold-standard clinical trial in Bangladesh, which backs up the findings of hundreds of previous observational and laboratory studies".

Here is a link to an article on your study titled:

Face masks for COVID pass their largest test yet

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y

Dialdriver... your post aged well...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAjKQY0_BQA&t=4188s
The Bangladesh study has been corrected. So much for your buddy who's a masking expert.

Fools

[WellThatAgedWell]

https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health- ... in-quebec/

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/

Are masks supposed to make Covid worse?

The province with mandatory masking has higher daily deaths, higher hospitalization, higher daily case counts.

[piperdriver]

Our government is truly delusional. You don't need a mask to protect yourself, just put down the fork. We know obesity is the real killer when it comes to Covid 19 (and many other diseases). If you want to really protect yourself from Covid 19 maybe substitute that pop and chips for a chicken and salad. Exercise a half an hour a day, walking running, maybe hop on the bike get some fresh air. You don't need to be a top tier athlete just get off couch and do something. It's not rocket science.

IMO the unvaccinated never clogged up hospitals and ICU's it was obese unhealthy people. This has been happening for decades long before COVID and will continue in the future. Why? Because many people have terrible diets and are lazy, simple as that.

[WellThatAgedWell]

C677601E-4578-4078-A779-2F68108061A5.jpeg (342.21 KiB) Viewed 3181 times

February 2021 to April 2021 cases increase by 4x with no change in public health guidelines
- media narrative, “get vaccinated, it’s 90 percent effective”
- Dr. Fauci, “wear two masks at the same time!”
- mask religion thinkers “we know masks aren’t perfect but they save millions of lives!”

February 2022 to April 2022 cases increase by 2x with most places dropping mask mandates.
- media narrative, “cases explode as masks are removed!”
- mask religion thinkers “we knew if we removed masking Covid cases would increase”. Just like the covidians say “I’m so glad I got my 3rd booster because I got Covid and it would have been so much worse if I didn’t get the shot”

I think we could make a case that masking policy has done nothing beneficial for public health.

Our government is truly delusional.

I think it’s intentional.