Major Study Finds Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rates

Major Study Finds Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rates

NOVEMBER 18, 2020 By Jordan Davidson

A high-quality, large-scale Danish study finds no evidence that wearing a face mask significantly minimizes people’s risk of contracting COVID-19. The randomized-control trial found no statistically significant difference in coronavirus infection rates between mask-wearers and non-mask-wearers. In fact, according to the data, mask usage may actually increase the likelihood of infection.

“The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use,” the authors summarized their results.

While mask-wearing has been advertised by health officials all around the world, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, the Danish researchers found that there was no statistically significant difference between wearing a mask or not in preventing people from contracting COVID-19.

“In the third post hoc analysis, which investigated constellations of patient characteristics, we did not find a subgroup where face masks were effective at conventional levels of statistical significance,” researchers found.

The randomized-control trial, which is considered the “gold-standard” design for scientific research, had a large sample size of more than 6,000 people. Most studies conducted on various kinds of face masks against various coronaviruses are neither randomized, controlled trials nor conducted regarding the specific SARS-CoV-2 virus currently affecting the world.

. . . Dr. Christine Laine, editor-in-chief of the Annals of Internal Medicine, where the study is published, told The New York Times the research shows masks “are not a magic bullet.” In an article, Laine and other editors defended the journal’s decision to publish the study despite pushback… . . .

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

4 Likes

Or that they do:

2 Likes

Your Beaumont study was in a health care setting (not societal setting).

Not relevant.

I will look at your other references later.

1 Like

Just maybe this will get through to the sheep who follow the mask mafioso.

I’ve been shouting this one from the rooftops for awhile now. You want protection using a mask? You need to be using N95’s or better. Those cloth masks and those cheap surgical masks will not only not keep you safe, they’ll help the spread. There are so many regions reporting increased cases despite mask orders that have been in place for months, not days, not weeks, months. You normies gotta start opening your minds to the possibility that the mask orders are not helping matters at all.

Masks were proven not to work in the 1918 flu epidemic; they were proven for many decades not to work against influenza and other viruses that pass via respiratory means. They are even finding out that surgical masks don’t do that much for their original intended purpose: in operating rooms. Mask studies that claim efficacy are all deeply flawed. I posted several weeks ago about this.

3 Likes

Not only that but the N-95s say right on the package, they need to be changed out every few hours.

We no longer have the box or instructions as it was purchased b.c. (before coronamania).

But I think the actual instructions were something to the effect of the need to change out the mask every three hours.

So even with N-95 protection,
you better have several masks on hand.

2 Likes

That’s the thing: none of these “supportive” tests are measuring in real life conditions. Period. None.

They only measure people sitting still for a few minutes, 15 at most.
They don’t measure anyone over the time the mask degrades.
They don’t account in any way for the length of time.
They don’t measure anyone after they’ve worn their mask all day long.
They don’t measure workers like grocery cashiers, etc.
They don’t measure the leakage on the sides of the masks.
They don’t account for evaporation of water droplets.

Are you getting the picture? Need I go on?

N95’s or better only will do anything good for you and yes, Cathoholic is correct about the need to change them out regularly.

What the actual heck, people? Start opening your minds to the mask fraud.

3 Likes

For every study that says masks don’t do any good there are several that say they do.

I’m going to keep wearing mine and avoid people who don’t wear one.

3 Likes

The study itself reports

Limitation:

Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.

Conclusion:

The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.

I have no confidence in the robustness of this study due to its listed limitations.

There was also no observable statistical difference as reported in the study.

Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.

4 Likes

“N95’s or better only will do anything good for you and yes, Cathoholic is correct about the need to change them out regularly.”

N95’s are said to filter out 95% of particles as small as 0.3 microns. The Wuhan Flu is .125 microns big. Respiratory droplets are as small as .5 microns. Virus are also said to be able to invade the body through skin pores and the eyes. And if you can smell smoke (.4 to .7 microns) through a mask then it isn’t protecting you from a virus.

3 Likes

This study posted by the OP is a randomized-control trial and I’m not sure if the other ones posted were.
Huh. Maybe this is why the CDC and the WHO told us not to bother with masks, way back when.
Remember that? :joy:

2 Likes

CradleRC58 . . .

I’m going to keep wearing mine and avoid people who don’t wear one.

By all means.

The problem isn’t wearing masks necessarily.

The scope of the issue goes to Government executive mandates disguised as “laws”.

.

For every study that says masks don’t do any good there are several that say they do.

I’m sorry to say, but there is not one study (that I am aware of) that suggests masks are useful in a societal setting. Not one.

At least under the conditions we see.

Which is probably WHY the WHO tells us this. I’m sure they will change on even scant evidence.

However, WHO acknowledges that we lack evidence that wearing a mask protects healthy persons from SARS-CoV-2 (prevention) (17).

Bold mine.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

The politicians here were having you mask-up before any studies of this sort could even be done.

The other issue is (and even the USA people asserting mask-deliverance assert this) masks can be a CAUSE of spread too if misused.

Think about that the next time you get out of your car at the grocery store and see people who will be standing next to you (6’) in the store, grab their dirty soiled mask from their rear-view mirror and put it on while walking into the store.

.

If I’m on a plane for example, I’m wearing an N-95 mask for example. I have no issue with those who do want to wear masks under the proper circumstances.

I do so myself.

2 Likes

It still may not help. You will still be pulling in unfiltered air. I have a lot of experience with N-95 masks, and they do not seal around the face. That is how they fail. There is no practical way to seal a typical N-95 around the face.

The only thing that is effective is a respirator. I have yet to see anyone wearing one of those when I am out and about. They are uncomfortable unless you are used to wearing them. They are generally hot and sweaty underneath because they are sealed against the skin.

2 Likes

They did that because the science backed that position going back over 100 years to the Spanish Flu outbreak. Suddenly they change their minds and now we are seeing studies intentionally designed to support the new normal. But every one of those studies is deeply flawed; this is intentional, they don’t want you to know the truth.

Which is that they found that forcing people to wear masks is a form of psychological subjugation. Something the Arabs have known since long before Islam. What major culture today makes women wear masks? What sort of position does one think women are placed in when they are forced to wear masks society-wide? Now extend your thinking … and think about why people are rebelling against these orders; they’re rebelling against the posture of submission they’ve been forced into.

3 Likes

You are part of the 92% of Americans who say they do.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/10/poll-increasing-bipartisan-majority-americans-support-mask-wearing/

1 Like

I thought N95’s were respirators.

1 Like

image

An N95

2 Likes

Do a web search on “N95 respirator”. N95’s are described as respirators.

1 Like

Maybe. But I was given an n95! where I work and it looked like the one pictured b

1 Like

They technically are respirators. But anyone who has experience actually using them will tell you they are a mask, and that a respirator looks like this:

3 Likes

N95s have faults that make them not that suitable for those with the virus in preventing its spread.
Certainly they are effective in not breathing in virus. They are very ineffective in preventing virii being expelled out into the environment.

3 Likes
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.