ADVERTISEMENT

Face masks made "little to no difference"

MountaineerWV

All-American
Sep 18, 2007
23,996
7,490
668
Now, go f**k off. And take your mask with you.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/face-masks-made-little-no-001748577.html

The stance by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on face masks has taken many twists and turns throughout the COVID pandemic.

After initially claiming face coverings weren’t necessary, the CDC changed course in April 2020, calling on all Americans — even children as young as 2 years old — to mask up.

That September, then-CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said during a Senate hearing that "face masks are the most important powerful health tool we have," even suggesting that they might offer more protection than vaccines.

Those recommendations likely played a large part in 39 U.S. states eventually enacting mask mandates.

Now, a new scientific review suggests that widespread masking may have done little to nothing to curb the transmission of COVID-19.

The review, titled "Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses," was led by 12 researchers from esteemed universities around the world.

Published by Cochrane Library, the review dug into the findings of 78 randomized controlled trials to determine whether "physical interventions" — including face masks and hand-washing — lessened the spread of respiratory viruses.

When comparing the use of medical/surgical masks to wearing no masks, the review found that "wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people)."

Next, the review compared medical/surgical masks to N95 respirators (or P2 respirators, which are used in Europe).

It found that "wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people)."

The 78 studies looked at participants from countries of all income levels.

Data was gathered during the H1N1 flu pandemic in 2009, non-epidemic flu seasons, epidemic flu seasons up to 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic, the study authors wrote.

The new findings seem to call into question the CDC’s enthusiastic embrace of widespread masking.

However, Dr. Marc Siegel, professor of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center and a Fox News medical contributor, pointed out a key limitation: "The researchers focus primarily on randomized trials, but most of the studies that have been done on masks are population studies," he said.

"There are very few randomized trials on masks."

In a randomized trial, researchers place participants in different groups and observe the results in a controlled environment.

By contrast, population-based studies measure outcomes in a "real-world" setting.

The study authors did admit to some limitations and a risk of bias, including the low number of people who followed mask guidance and the wide variation of outcomes.

"The results might change when further evidence becomes available," they wrote.

Dr. Siegel said he has never supported mask mandates.

He believes that while masks might be effective on an individual level, they don’t work as well on a population level.

"If you’re going to mandate something, you’d have to be sure of consistency across the population, and that’s never happened," he said.

However, the physician pointed out that the CDC never actually mandated masks — with the exception of a public transportation mandate in January 2021.

"It was the state and local authorities that took the CDC’s recommendations and implemented the mandates," Dr. Siegel said.

"The recommendations may have been wrong, but the CDC doesn’t deserve the blame for everything. I think they were aware that masks may have value on a personal basis, but they got carried away with the politics."

As of right now, no U.S. states have mask mandates in place.

On Sunday, New York dropped its state-wide mask requirement in hospitals — leaving the decision up to individual facilities. Many health care facilities are currently still requiring them.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: moe
Now, go f**k off. And take your mask with you.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/face-masks-made-little-no-001748577.html

The stance by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on face masks has taken many twists and turns throughout the COVID pandemic.

After initially claiming face coverings weren’t necessary, the CDC changed course in April 2020, calling on all Americans — even children as young as 2 years old — to mask up.

That September, then-CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said during a Senate hearing that "face masks are the most important powerful health tool we have," even suggesting that they might offer more protection than vaccines.

Those recommendations likely played a large part in 39 U.S. states eventually enacting mask mandates.

Now, a new scientific review suggests that widespread masking may have done little to nothing to curb the transmission of COVID-19.

The review, titled "Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses," was led by 12 researchers from esteemed universities around the world.

Published by Cochrane Library, the review dug into the findings of 78 randomized controlled trials to determine whether "physical interventions" — including face masks and hand-washing — lessened the spread of respiratory viruses.

When comparing the use of medical/surgical masks to wearing no masks, the review found that "wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people)."

Next, the review compared medical/surgical masks to N95 respirators (or P2 respirators, which are used in Europe).

It found that "wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people)."

The 78 studies looked at participants from countries of all income levels.

Data was gathered during the H1N1 flu pandemic in 2009, non-epidemic flu seasons, epidemic flu seasons up to 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic, the study authors wrote.

The new findings seem to call into question the CDC’s enthusiastic embrace of widespread masking.

However, Dr. Marc Siegel, professor of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center and a Fox News medical contributor, pointed out a key limitation: "The researchers focus primarily on randomized trials, but most of the studies that have been done on masks are population studies," he said.

"There are very few randomized trials on masks."

In a randomized trial, researchers place participants in different groups and observe the results in a controlled environment.

By contrast, population-based studies measure outcomes in a "real-world" setting.

The study authors did admit to some limitations and a risk of bias, including the low number of people who followed mask guidance and the wide variation of outcomes.

"The results might change when further evidence becomes available," they wrote.

Dr. Siegel said he has never supported mask mandates.

He believes that while masks might be effective on an individual level, they don’t work as well on a population level.

"If you’re going to mandate something, you’d have to be sure of consistency across the population, and that’s never happened," he said.

However, the physician pointed out that the CDC never actually mandated masks — with the exception of a public transportation mandate in January 2021.

"It was the state and local authorities that took the CDC’s recommendations and implemented the mandates," Dr. Siegel said.

"The recommendations may have been wrong, but the CDC doesn’t deserve the blame for everything. I think they were aware that masks may have value on a personal basis, but they got carried away with the politics."

As of right now, no U.S. states have mask mandates in place.

On Sunday, New York dropped its state-wide mask requirement in hospitals — leaving the decision up to individual facilities. Many health care facilities are currently still requiring them.
Those of us with just 1 ounce of common sense knew this...
 
When the "experts" you believed in so much are now coming out saying "oops".
The article is about a study not about "experts coming out saying 'oops'". No one is retracting statements or admitting they were wrong. I've included a quote from the actual study. Not surprisingly it's a Fox News story.

Key messages
We are uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses based on the studies we assessed.

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamaEER
I get it. Truth hurts you very much. When the "experts" you believed in so much are now coming out saying "oops".
He wouldn't admit that if Dr fauci said it ... so many experts so wrong so many times the last couple years makes a sane person question the motives or at least it should.
 
I get it. Truth hurts you very much. When the "experts" you believed in so much are now coming out saying "oops".
let's not forget all the virtue projection by those wearing a mask and socially assaulting others when not worn. The media did this quite a bit too. Reminds me of some who drive a Prius and project how much more they feel they are environmentally sensitive compared to those who supposedly don't because they don't drive one.
 
Last edited:
Now, go f**k off. And take your mask with you.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/face-masks-made-little-no-001748577.html

The stance by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on face masks has taken many twists and turns throughout the COVID pandemic.

After initially claiming face coverings weren’t necessary, the CDC changed course in April 2020, calling on all Americans — even children as young as 2 years old — to mask up.

That September, then-CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said during a Senate hearing that "face masks are the most important powerful health tool we have," even suggesting that they might offer more protection than vaccines.

Those recommendations likely played a large part in 39 U.S. states eventually enacting mask mandates.

Now, a new scientific review suggests that widespread masking may have done little to nothing to curb the transmission of COVID-19.

The review, titled "Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses," was led by 12 researchers from esteemed universities around the world.

Published by Cochrane Library, the review dug into the findings of 78 randomized controlled trials to determine whether "physical interventions" — including face masks and hand-washing — lessened the spread of respiratory viruses.

When comparing the use of medical/surgical masks to wearing no masks, the review found that "wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people)."

Next, the review compared medical/surgical masks to N95 respirators (or P2 respirators, which are used in Europe).

It found that "wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people)."

The 78 studies looked at participants from countries of all income levels.

Data was gathered during the H1N1 flu pandemic in 2009, non-epidemic flu seasons, epidemic flu seasons up to 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic, the study authors wrote.

The new findings seem to call into question the CDC’s enthusiastic embrace of widespread masking.

However, Dr. Marc Siegel, professor of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center and a Fox News medical contributor, pointed out a key limitation: "The researchers focus primarily on randomized trials, but most of the studies that have been done on masks are population studies," he said.

"There are very few randomized trials on masks."

In a randomized trial, researchers place participants in different groups and observe the results in a controlled environment.

By contrast, population-based studies measure outcomes in a "real-world" setting.

The study authors did admit to some limitations and a risk of bias, including the low number of people who followed mask guidance and the wide variation of outcomes.

"The results might change when further evidence becomes available," they wrote.

Dr. Siegel said he has never supported mask mandates.

He believes that while masks might be effective on an individual level, they don’t work as well on a population level.

"If you’re going to mandate something, you’d have to be sure of consistency across the population, and that’s never happened," he said.

However, the physician pointed out that the CDC never actually mandated masks — with the exception of a public transportation mandate in January 2021.

"It was the state and local authorities that took the CDC’s recommendations and implemented the mandates," Dr. Siegel said.

"The recommendations may have been wrong, but the CDC doesn’t deserve the blame for everything. I think they were aware that masks may have value on a personal basis, but they got carried away with the politics."

As of right now, no U.S. states have mask mandates in place.

On Sunday, New York dropped its state-wide mask requirement in hospitals — leaving the decision up to individual facilities. Many health care facilities are currently still requiring them.
Funny how anyone who said this obvious stuff a couple years ago was mocked and told how dumb they were but now the truth backs up the common sense from the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roadtrasheer
let's not forget all the virtual projection by those wearing a mask and socially assaulting others when not worn. The media did this quite a bit too. Reminds me of some who drive a Prius and project how much more they feel they are environmentally sensitive compared to those who supposedly don't because they don't drive one.
My helper was fired in 2020 over not wearing a mask . Outside in a open field 80° working in a ditch ... these kunts need curb stomped twice . They wanted me to have one on under my welding shield.
 
My helper was fired in 2020 over not wearing a mask . Outside in an open field 80° working in a ditch ... these kunts need curb stomped twice . They wanted me to have one on under my welding shield.
Serious question. Now that this it is being determined that masks didn’t help, will there be legal follow ups by those that either lost their job or were denied opportunities because they were maskless?
 
Anyone who thinks the CDC, NIH, WHO, or any of the other Government or non governmental agencies was telling the Truth about Covid or believed whatever caca they were saying about it deserves whatever this scam did to them.

Sorry but just a little applied common sense should have made it plain to see this was nothing more than a phony made up, manufactured "plandemic". :rolleyes:
 
Serious question. Now that this it is being determined that masks didn’t help, will there be legal follow ups by those that either lost their job or were denied opportunities because they were maskless?
Maybe no actionable legal claims because the defense can always be used that decisions were made to protect public safety in the face of a health pandemic. However some are successfully fighting to have their jobs reinstated for refusing to wear them.
 
Masks don't make a difference in spreading respiratory viruses. Masks do make it harder to breathe, they make it harder to communicate and they fog up glasses. The problem now is that, even if mask mandates are dropped, people still feel forced to wear them in certain places. The reasons for this are all bad. Irrational fear, virtue signaling and peer pressure to conform are among the top reasons. None of the reasons benefit public health or societal health. In fact, wearing masks fosters weak-minded dependency. People who intellectually understand that masks are of no public health benefit, will still be obliged to wear them.
I predict that even if the CDC drops mask mandates, hospitals will continue to mandate masks in their facilities. This is because hospitals, like most corporations, have committees who make these decisions. They always opt for the most restrictive policies to show how much they care. I wish people would look at the negatives of masks. I'm forced to wear one all day on my job which makes me feel foolish because I know they don't help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 30CAT and atlkvb
Serious question. Now that this it is being determined that masks didn’t help, will there be legal follow ups by those that either lost their job or were denied opportunities because they were maskless?
Should be , but who would a person sue the CDC? It cost him a lot , a good man with kids and lost his way of supporting them . I lost 18 months on a high scale job , who could I sue ? Our union told us nothing they can do .....like always...
 
Maybe no actionable legal claims because the defense can always be used that decisions were made to protect public safety in the face of a health pandemic. However some are successfully fighting to have their jobs reinstated for refusing to wear them.
Did Congress not award Japanese-Americans thousands of dollars in the 1980's for the internment camps? Believe so. They rounded them up for "public safety" too. Just saying there is precedent.
 
Should be , but who would a person sue the CDC? It cost him a lot , a good man with kids and lost his way of supporting them . I lost 18 months on a high scale job , who could I sue ? Our union told us nothing they can do .....like always...
There is something that can be done, and should be done. They violated people's rights and did so under a lie. There is precedent for this.
 
Some on this board need treatment for severe Covid PTSD.

"Tell'em giddy moe! Your treatment was deez nuts!"
Donald-Trump-Hillary-Clinton-714497.jpg
 
Did Congress not award Japanese-Americans thousands of dollars in the 1980's for the internment camps? Believe so. They rounded them up for "public safety" too. Just saying there is precedent
Japanese-Americans were not considered a public safety "health threat". They were rounded up (allegedly) for national security reasons...as bogus as that was. There was no legitimate security or health justification for illegally detaining them...most of them were American citizens! The Covid scam by contrast was a known lie and a pre-fabricated, planned attempt by government to randomly seize power. It never was a health "pandemic" and it never required our entire economy to be involuntarily shut down. Everything that's come out since has confirmed exactly what I just said. If anything, the perps in the government who carried out this massive hoax should be imprisoned.
 
Japanese-Americans were not considered a public safety "health threat". They were rounded up (allegedly) for national security reasons...as bogus as that was. There was no legitimate security or health justification for illegally detaining them...most of them were American citizens! The Covid scam by contrast was a known lie and a pre-fabricated, planned attempt by government to randomly seize power. It never was a health "pandemic" and it never required our entire economy to be involuntarily shut down. Everything that's come out since has confirmed exactly what I just said. If anything, the perps in the government who carried out this massive hoax should be imprisoned.
Allegedly?
 
Allegedly?
Yes. There was no national security "threat" posed by Japanese-Americans during our conflict with Japan. It was all based on fear and hype, just like the Covid scam.

They didn't need to be "rounded up" and quarantined just like we didn't need to stay holed up in our homes or wearing those worthless masks during the Covid scam.
 
Yes. There was no national security "threat" posed by Japanese-Americans during our conflict with Japan. It was all based on fear and hype, just like the Covid scam.

They didn't need to be "rounded up" and quarantined just like we didn't need to stay holed up in our homes or wearing those worthless masks during the Covid scam.
Ok. I thought you were saying they were "allegedly" rounded up. Misread it. My bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atlkvb
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT