the CDC and health officials love to use ginned up lab studies on mannequins etc to show that “masks stop droplet spread” as though that means anything. it doesn’t.
spread is mostly aerosol, not droplet
masks will nebulize droplets into aerosols anyhow
masks do not seal and do not stop aerosols, they just redirect them
watch as emily of team reality demolishes these bogus “forward projection” methodologies in a simple demonstration.
if you are just measuring droplets 6 feet straight ahead, you’ve missed the whole ballgame. masks do not stop the airflow or the viruses. at best, they just redirect them.
your mask does not protect me (or you) and contrived mechanistic studies could not prove that it did anyhow.
demand real clinical outcomes studies with valid control groups in an actual societal setting.
anything else cannot possibly give you the info you need.
there is a great deal in this thread worth reading. recommend y’all do.
Very good article, as usual! On the other hand, there is an argument that I very seldom see anywhere. Irrespective of the mechanistic theories or evidence, that fact is that the vast majority of people (with no symptoms of disease) in a community are not infectious. They are not shedding any virus. So, irrespective of whether masks can stop a virus or not, it makes no sense to have everyone in a community wearing masks. We have no reason to think that everyone around us is capable of giving us an infection just by passing nearby. People have been convinced of believing the absurd.
All of this has been obvious for nearly a year at this point, but in one aspect masks are the most important aspect of the virus -- without them we'd forget that we were supposed to be scared.
I remember debating this back in May/June 2020 ... and saying "let's wait for the clinical study from Denmark". Those results were published (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M20-6817?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org) and people started to spin the results to try to refute them. Masks don't work for influenza, and they don't work for coronaviruses. Masks are useless against respiratory viruses. There is not a single clinical study with clinical endpoints that supports the use of masks ... but Fauci et al will drone one about masks because it helps them retain power.
Those that don't wear a masks will be vindicated in the long run.
If the filter on the end of a cigarette doesn't stop the pathogen, a stupid cloth sure won't. I've used your "like stopping buckshot with a chain link fence" analogy a lot. A good visual. Most mask proponents aren't thinking rationally however.
Very excited to read this! The question of why mechanistic studies seemed to suggest mask efficacy while mask policies failed always niggled at me - what were we missing in that black box?
At the end of the day, when unit tests pass and end to end tests fail, you realize that you're testing the wrong thing, and you have to go with the actual system behavior. Still, very glad to have a satisfactory answer about why the mechanistic tests results weren't transferrable to the real world setting.
Please please please keep in mind that every nonsensical modelling/lab finding justification that the powers that be have used to prolong this pandemic has already been used, and will continue to be used, when the climate change tyrants come for your internal combustion engines and your natural gas plants. The same exact pattern of WHO knuckling under has been happening for 40 years at IPCC and will continue if someone doesn't punch back.
Of course masks do not "work" for the ostensible purpose of protection from transmission. However, that is a secondary point. The CDC's *first* attempts to justify "masking up" were based upon the belief that asymptomatic transmission could drive infections. We now know that asymptomatic transmission is not "a thing," as you noted in another article. (Something like 0.7% I believe, even in homes with close contact between people are who actually infected?) So, not only do masks not work, but even if they did, we do not need them. We do not need protection from a population of people--otherwise known as "well" or healthy--who are out there infecting everyone they pass in the store. Correct me if I am wrong on any of this.
Very good article, as usual! On the other hand, there is an argument that I very seldom see anywhere. Irrespective of the mechanistic theories or evidence, that fact is that the vast majority of people (with no symptoms of disease) in a community are not infectious. They are not shedding any virus. So, irrespective of whether masks can stop a virus or not, it makes no sense to have everyone in a community wearing masks. We have no reason to think that everyone around us is capable of giving us an infection just by passing nearby. People have been convinced of believing the absurd.
agree.
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/asymptomatic-covid-spread
How did I miss Ivan's comment? (Said the same thing, only not as well.) Geez.
All of this has been obvious for nearly a year at this point, but in one aspect masks are the most important aspect of the virus -- without them we'd forget that we were supposed to be scared.
I remember debating this back in May/June 2020 ... and saying "let's wait for the clinical study from Denmark". Those results were published (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M20-6817?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org) and people started to spin the results to try to refute them. Masks don't work for influenza, and they don't work for coronaviruses. Masks are useless against respiratory viruses. There is not a single clinical study with clinical endpoints that supports the use of masks ... but Fauci et al will drone one about masks because it helps them retain power.
Those that don't wear a masks will be vindicated in the long run.
If the filter on the end of a cigarette doesn't stop the pathogen, a stupid cloth sure won't. I've used your "like stopping buckshot with a chain link fence" analogy a lot. A good visual. Most mask proponents aren't thinking rationally however.
Very excited to read this! The question of why mechanistic studies seemed to suggest mask efficacy while mask policies failed always niggled at me - what were we missing in that black box?
At the end of the day, when unit tests pass and end to end tests fail, you realize that you're testing the wrong thing, and you have to go with the actual system behavior. Still, very glad to have a satisfactory answer about why the mechanistic tests results weren't transferrable to the real world setting.
Unrelated, but enjoy this gato treat! https://youtu.be/YiE8V7sqjvw
Please please please keep in mind that every nonsensical modelling/lab finding justification that the powers that be have used to prolong this pandemic has already been used, and will continue to be used, when the climate change tyrants come for your internal combustion engines and your natural gas plants. The same exact pattern of WHO knuckling under has been happening for 40 years at IPCC and will continue if someone doesn't punch back.
Of course masks do not "work" for the ostensible purpose of protection from transmission. However, that is a secondary point. The CDC's *first* attempts to justify "masking up" were based upon the belief that asymptomatic transmission could drive infections. We now know that asymptomatic transmission is not "a thing," as you noted in another article. (Something like 0.7% I believe, even in homes with close contact between people are who actually infected?) So, not only do masks not work, but even if they did, we do not need them. We do not need protection from a population of people--otherwise known as "well" or healthy--who are out there infecting everyone they pass in the store. Correct me if I am wrong on any of this.
We took huge risk on Easter and had family and in laws over for dinner.......
We received two potted plants ne w/ tulips and on Easter Lilies. I discovered I am allergic to the Lilies.
Does CDC or MDs treating allergies suggest masking to counter pollen? Pretty sure pollen is way bigger than corona or flu virus.......
I noted my eye itch so masking for any pathogen would require covering the tear ducts as well to "work".
Keep the Easter Lily away from the cat...they truly are toxic for our feline friends and we have to keep them around!!