The face mask discussion

[Gwin Ru]

...

[pueblo]

A new Danish study.

Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers

A Randomized Controlled Trial

Henning Bundgaard, DMSc, Johan Skov Bundgaard, BSc,
Author, Article and Disclosure Information https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-6817



Abstract

Background:

Observational evidence suggests that mask wearing mitigates transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is uncertain if this observed association arises through protection of uninfected wearers (protective effect), via reduced transmission from infected mask wearers (source control), or both.

Objective:

To assess whether recommending surgical mask use outside the home reduces wearers' risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a setting where masks were uncommon and not among recommended public health measures.

Design:

Randomized controlled trial (DANMASK-19 [Danish Study to Assess Face Masks for the Protection Against COVID-19 Infection]). (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04337541)

Setting:

Denmark, April and May 2020.

Participants:

Adults spending more than 3 hours per day outside the home without occupational mask use.

Intervention:

Encouragement to follow social distancing measures for coronavirus disease 2019, plus either no mask recommendation or a recommendation to wear a mask when outside the home among other persons together with a supply of 50 surgical masks and instructions for proper use.

Measurements:

The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection in the mask wearer at 1 month by antibody testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or hospital diagnosis. The secondary outcome was PCR positivity for other respiratory viruses.

Results:

A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). 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.

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.

Primary Funding Source:

The Salling Foundations.

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

[Tintin]

Thanks Pueblo

Here's a related Spectator article that expands on the study - this is perhaps the most interesting and arguably perhaps the most comprehensive study undertaken to date.

_________________________________

Source: The Spectator

Prof Carl Heneghan & Tom Jefferson

Landmark Danish study shows face masks have no significant effect

19 November 2020, 7:45am



(Photo: Getty)



Do face masks work? Earlier this year, the UK government decided that masks could play a significant role in stopping Covid-19 and made masks mandatory in a number of public places. But are these policies backed by the scientific evidence?

Yesterday marked the publication of a long-delayed trial in Denmark which hopes to answer that very question. The ‘Danmask-19 trial’ was conducted in the spring with over 3,000 participants, when the public were not being told to wear masks but other public health measures were in place. Unlike other studies looking at masks, the Danmask study was a randomised controlled trial – making it the highest quality scientific evidence.

Around half of those in the trial received 50 disposable surgical face masks, which they were told to change after eight hours of use. After one month, the trial participants were tested using both PCR, antibody and lateral flow tests and compared with the trial participants who did not wear a mask.

In the end, there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19. 1.8 per cent of those wearing masks caught Covid, compared to 2.1 per cent of the control group. As a result, it seems that any effect masks have on preventing the spread of the disease in the community is small.

Some people, of course, did not wear their masks properly. Only 46 per cent of those wearing masks in the trial said they had completely adhered to the rules. But even if you only look at people who wore masks ‘exactly as instructed’, this did not make any difference to the results: 2 per cent of this group were also infected.

When it comes to masks, it appears there is still little good evidence they prevent the spread of airborne diseases. The results of the Danmask-19 trial mirror other reviews into influenza-like illnesses. Nine other trials looking at the efficacy of masks (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.

But 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 randomised 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.

But observational studies are prone to recall bias: in the heat of a pandemic, not very many people will recall if and when they used masks and at what distance they kept from others. The lack of random allocation of masks can also ‘confound’ the results and might not account for seasonal effects. A recent observational study paper had to be withdrawn because the reported fall in infection rates over the summer was reverted when the seasonal effect took hold and rates went back up.

This is why large, randomised trials like this most recent Danish study are so important if we want to understand the impact of measures like face masks. Many people have argued that it is too difficult to wait for randomised trials – but Danmask-19 has shown that these kind of studies are more than feasible.

And now that we have properly rigorous scientific research we can rely on, the evidence shows that wearing masks in the community does not significantly reduce the rates of infection.

WRITTEN BY
Prof Carl Heneghan & Tom Jefferson
Carl Heneghan is professor of evidence-based medicine at the University of Oxford and director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Tom Jefferson is a senior associate tutor and honorary research fellow at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford

[Patient]

http://torontosun.com/news/local-new...ent-the-answer

Doctor on COVID front lines speaks out on why more lockdowns aren't the answer

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=L2t2ikt_pWY

[thepainterdoug]

READ THIS!!! /
https://summit.news/2020/11/18/top-p...ecting-public/

[Sue (Ayt)]

Dr. Roger Hodkinson
CEO & Medical Director of Western Medical Assessments for over 20 years, speaks out.
Cambridge University UK medical degree and Royal College certified pathologist in Canada.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=01psekGKn3Y

[ExomatrixTV]

Contradictions are the footprints of Deceit.
NEW ZEALAND MASKS DO NOT WORK

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=b1iBguA-PRQ

[Eva2]

A minor rant . Today I went to coffee place (just to pick up an order) and wore the required mask. I removed my mask as soon as I walked out to the parking lot. I noticed a group of 3 people standing around my car, talking and they were wearing masks (something I don't really get when we're outside - better to breathe fresh air than inhale the moist, warm germ-laden air under the mask). As soon as I approached my car, one of the masked guys aggressively erupted and began spewing an x-rated rant at me for not wearing a mask. He sure didn't hold back his opinion about my not wearing a mask even though everyone else had to and (many) words to the effect that I was a selfish bitch and so forth. He was ramping up to go nuclear on me so I hurriedly got in my car and left. I live in a rural community and often walk my dog in many forested areas, nature trails, etc. and sometimes pass people on these trails, all wearing masks...I don't get it!

[DaveToo]

Today, Nov 20, 2020, a grocery store that I had been shopping at since the plandemic started, without a face mask, warned me that I would not be able to return again unless I wore one.
'Cases' have been rising in Canada and the store decided to do something about it.

I wonder if they will rescind this decision when the 'cases' drop to below today's level (at a level that they did allow me to shop in their store without a face mask).

[Patient]

Posted by Jill (here)
A minor rant . Today I went to coffee place (just to pick up an order) and wore the required mask. I removed my mask as soon as I walked out to the parking lot. I noticed a group of 3 people standing around my car, talking and they were wearing masks (something I don't really get when we're outside - better to breathe fresh air than inhale the moist, warm germ-laden air under the mask). As soon as I approached my car, one of the masked guys aggressively erupted and began spewing an x-rated rant at me for not wearing a mask. He sure didn't hold back his opinion about my not wearing a mask even though everyone else had to and (many) words to the effect that I was a selfish bitch and so forth. He was ramping up to go nuclear on me so I hurriedly got in my car and left. I live in a rural community and often walk my dog in many forested areas, nature trails, etc. and sometimes pass people on these trails, all wearing masks...I don't get it!

In my opinion of course; Going through this plandemic has shown us some new things - some of these we just hypothesized before - but people are programmed/brainwashed and it looks to me that those who are already "pre-conditioned" are easily programmable for any new agenda that comes along.

Scary. I had read in the past things about affecting people's minds through the hertz rate of a TV screen. Subliminal advertising is banned in some countries but in North America the restrictions have been lifted and the law around it is flimsy and easy to navigate around for the advertiser.

People can be affected in different ways very quickly. Now with so much social leisure activity and entertainment removed from our lives, people's stress levels are rising and people are more easily agitated.

When you look at a person wearing a mask, who do you see? So much of their identity is not evident. The amount of emotion that we usually see in a person's face is no longer visible.

The masks have to come off. People need to get the oxygen levels back up in their blood and brains.

[Eva2]

'When you look at a person wearing a mask, who do you see? So much of their identity is not evident. The amount of emotion that we usually see in a person's face is no longer visible.'

For sure - I'm not sure who and where this was posted but I recall someone making an astute observation about the psychological effects of wearing a mask - its a control mechanism that tends to depersonalize and disempower. It makes one feel more vunerable, helpless, insecure and dependent on another. The poster likened it to women with face coverings in "sects" where every aspect of their lives is controlled by men.

[Deborah (ahamkara)]

I live in Portland, Oregon. As I walk the suburban trails around my home the percentage of people in masks outdoors, socially distancing, is close to 90%. There is. Lot of fear and anxiety emanating from people, despite the evidence that transmission is NOT occurring out of doors on hiking trails. The local media is in near hysteria over the ever expanding new cases. We are back on a semi lockdown “pause”, with restaurants, gyms, yoga studios, indoor recreation areas, all closed. Governor Kate Brown today encouraged citizens to call police on families defying her Covid restrictions- especially for the holiday of Thanksgiving. Masks have become a visible symbol of group think. There use is extremely psychological. I feel sad when I see children riding their bikes with a mask. There is 100% compliance with mask wearing indoors at shops and businesses.

[Gwin Ru]

...

[Gwin Ru]

...

... say no more:

Gavin Newsom caught wiring half a billion dollars to communist China in massive face mask money laundering scheme

Tuesday, July 07, 2020 by: Ethan Huff

[Eva2]

B.C., Canada, introduces $230 fine for not wearing masks

https://www.cheknews.ca/b-c-introduc...EekbxkehVYIz1Q

[Metaphor]

Latest from Mediabear

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=7i-gmf0RyGs

[greybeard]

Legal and Health Issues Around Face Mask Wearing at School


https://worlddoctorsalliance.com/blo...ing-at-school/

[Philippe]

Masks: The Science & The Myths (Dr. Lee Merritt)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=9RaBLKKXJt4

Excellent content in this presentation by Dr.Lee Merritt

She stresses the risks for the children and an entire new generation that may have sequels. In France the outrage against the measure of whole day mask wearing for schoolchildren of 6 years and on, is now seen in many manifestations around the country.

Meanwhile the majority of humanity walks around like masked zombies. All victims in this year of exposure of the medical scientific barbarism on the planet.

[ExomatrixTV]

🌐 Mask-Poll-2020
🌐 UnhealthyMasks
🌐 WHO-Unmasked
🌐 Anti-Masks-Debate
🌐 Face-Masks-Hysteria
🌐 WhyFaceMasksDoNotWork
🌐 WinkIfYouKnowMasksAreBS
🌐 Experts-Exposing-Masks-Tyranny

⚠️ Dutch 🇳🇱 Mondkapjes-Werken-Niet ‼️

‼️ Research: The-Covid-Cult

[Eva2]

'Every day, it seems like COVID-19 laws get more and more bizarre. From mask mandates to arbitrary business closures, it has become next to impossible to keep up with the rule changes and their logic.

And now, they’re targeting churches!

Under B.C.’s new province-wide COVID-19 restrictions, churches and other places of worship have been forced to close in what our un-elected health officials claim is an attempt to curb the spread of the virus.

Yet restaurants, bars, and gyms remain relatively unaffected. How does any of this make sense?

That’s what brought me to Riverside Calvary Chapel this past Sunday, where worshippers chose to attend an indoor church service in defiance of the new rules.

A bylaw officer had been there all day to monitor the morning service before police arrived to issue the church a $2,300 fine! Not only that, but they also threatened to give out more fines if the church remained open.

Watch this video to see my interaction with the bylaw officer and police who came to issue the COVID fine.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Uo5u43oADAI

B.C. church FINED $2,300 for in-person services, police CAN'T
EXPLAIN which order was violated

Let’s get this straight: people can go to Costco with no issues, but they can’t attend a church service to worship God?

What’s worse, the police weren’t even sure what order they were there to enforce! So, where did they get the authority to issue this fine?

Can Canada still be referred to as “the true north strong and free” if we continue to head down this path?

Freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of religion have all fallen to the wayside because of these emergency measures, which are in direct contravention of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

We don’t think Riverside Calvary Chapel should have to pay this fine. Do you?

If we learned anything from our “Fight the Fines” civil liberties project, it’s that these fines won't easily stand up in court. And if you help us, we’ll make sure they never will.

Yours truly,

Drea Humphrey

P.S. We want to help as many people as we can fight these unconstitutional COVID fines. But we can’t do it alone — we need your help to crowdfund our lawyers and legal fees. We already have over twelve cases, but we won't stop until we defend every single Canadian who gets a lockdown ticket. And if you or someone you know received one of these ridiculous fines, please let us know at www.FightTheFines.com.

Rebel News Facebook Rebel News Twitter Rebel News YouTube Rebel News Instagram

Rebel News Network Ltd.
PO Box 61056, Eglinton/Dufferin RO, Toronto, ON M6E 5B2, Canada'