https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2414

Summary of the Lancet shutting down the task force to look into the origins of covid-19 because of conflicts of interest among the investigators.

Data from Florida schools both with and without mask mandates shows that masks on kids make no difference inside schools when it comes to covid cases. If science truly mattered no kids would be wearing masks in schools anywhere in America. pic.twitter.com/ytZfLlEwEJ

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) October 7, 2021

Of course flimsy cloth and surgical masks do nothing for Covid 19. That was established before Covid and still holds true. It is literally political theater. Mask mandates started out to show that the authorities are trying to "do something" and has now morphed into a cynical power play.

They started with mask mandates, now vaccines, now who can work where. It's all upside.

PackPA2015 said:

---

Wayland said:

---

PackPA2015 said:

---

Bangladesh Study on Masks

Actually, surgical (specifically) masks have shown benefit in a RCT by reducing spread. I think one of the important arms of the trial was increasing proper use of these masks with education and providing free masks to individuals within the study.

---

Certainly worth reviewing surgical masks further despite the flaws in the study, but the age stratification on effectiveness was super odd.

This is another take on that same study, Feel free to go all the way down the thread.

2/2/
What the study ACTUALLY measures is the impact of mask promotion on symptom reporting. Only if a person reports symptoms, are they asked to participate in a serology study—and only 40% of those with symptoms chose to have their blood taken. pic.twitter.com/wCkKnUIPaM

— Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK (@Emily_Burns_V) September 1, 2021

EDIT: the bad cat weighing in: https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/bangladesh-mask-study-do-not-believe

---

Yep, not a perfect study, as we have none.

As I mentioned in my original post that the most important piece of the study in my opinion was that proper education increased mask adherence (and proper wearing of a mask) which likely contributed to the lower transmission.

I noticed that Vinay Prasad has posted a few tweets that he was happy someone actually ran a RCT on it and that we need to continue to study it.


ETA: Who is the bad cat??

---

Even if the claim that surgical masks marginally reduced COVID risk ONLY in people over 50 in these villages, which is slightly dubious. But, I guess we can review.

Then we get to claim that cloth masks have been entirely useless this whole time and been nothing more than theater. Which means this intervention of widespread masking (primarily cloth) that Public Health has been thumping their chests over for the last year and a half as doing something, is a complete lie.

And again, I think public health should be fully culpable for any individual who believed they were protected by a cloth mask and took undue risk because of the promise of masking efficacy. It was a lie to promote an image that government was 'taking action' and to encourage people to get out. And it continues to be a massive failure.

Public health/government is so deep in this lie, that they can't step away. Some people will never again let go of this talisman. Completely their right, but sad that it is born of misinformation.

There are certainly specific times, quality of masking, and diseases where masking is appropriate. Population level masking for COVID is not one.

I would have loved for mask mandates to actually have made a difference. They don't.

I think that is another useful piece of the study - the fact that cloth masks did not provide any benefit whatsoever. That was, and is, a huge mistake and was used as a "well, we are doing something" approach. I totally agree on that.

I think the important takeaways from the study are that:
1. We need better and more RCTs on all of our NPIs, and PIs for that matter. This is how we learn what works and what does not.
2. This is a start to show that cloth masks do not work and there is a benefit, although small, that surgical masks do have an impact on transmission. Before vaccinations, CDC/WHO/NIH, etc. were grasping at straws to find anything that would help slow down transmission, hospitalizations, and deaths. I think we can all agree that a lot was wrong, but any benefit at the time was helpful.
3. Proper, evidence-based education can go a long way in treating disease.
4. Vaccines and current therapeutics (not many, but a few) are our new way of slowing transmission. The importance of masks is much less than it was previously. However, in the right population (immunocompromised, etc.), we can now advise that surgical masks should be the preferred route in keeping those folks healthy and well. For anyone reading, please do not think I am promoting mask mandates with this evidence. I know some will, but I do not agree with that in our current situation.

ETA: highlighted the point about mandates. I am NOT arguing for mandates. But, I also do not agree that masks, themselves, specifically surgical masks have no impact on COVID-19 transmission.

PackPA2015 said:

---

I think that is another useful piece of the study - the fact that cloth masks did not provide any benefit whatsoever. That was, and is, a huge mistake and was used as a "well, we are doing something" approach. I totally agree on that.

I think the important takeaways from the study are that:
1. We need better and more RCTs on all of our NPIs, and PIs for that matter. This is how we learn what works and what does not.
2. This is a start to show that cloth masks do not work and there is a benefit, although small, that surgical masks do have an impact on transmission. Before vaccinations, CDC/WHO/NIH, etc. were grasping at straws to find anything that would help slow down transmission, hospitalizations, and deaths. I think we can all agree that a lot was wrong, but any benefit at the time was helpful.
3. Proper, evidence-based education can go a long way in treating disease.
4. Vaccines and current therapeutics (not many, but a few) are our new way of slowing transmission. The importance of masks is much less than it was previously. However, in the right population (immunocompromised, etc.), we can now advise that surgical masks should be the preferred route in keeping those folks healthy and well. For anyone reading, please do not think I am promoting mask mandates with this evidence. I know some will, but I do not agree with that in our current situation.

ETA: highlighted the point about mandates. I am NOT arguing for mandates. But, I also do not agree that masks, themselves, specifically surgical masks have no impact on COVID-19 transmission.

---

Sorry, I am just a little heated up this morning, may be lashing out.

Since I don't think I can ever forgive Public Health for capitulating to unions and decimating schools. We saw even in the spring of 2020 in Europe that despite pandemic waves schools did not exacerbate community spread... and yet here we are still doing a song and dance a year and a half later.

We opened schools at the ABSOLUTE peak of identified cases for the entire pandemic in children in the Southeast US this fall. And what happened.... all over... regardless of local restrictions... or mask mandates... or whatever other theater localities are still engaged in????

Despite kids being in schools everywhere.... cases dropped..... regardless of the level of local theater or lack thereof.

Just an aside, that I needed to say today.... not directed at your or the current discussion... just still mad that schools weren't fully open last year and are still in part chaos this year.

Oldsouljer said:

---

PackPA2015 said:

---

Bangladesh Study on Masks

Actually, surgical (specifically) masks have shown benefit in a RCT by reducing spread. I think one of the important arms of the trial was increasing proper use of these masks with education and providing free masks to individuals within the study.

---

This study was posted on this thread some weeks ago. After actually reading it from first page to last, I wasn't all that sure that the experimental design was sound. Maybe it is. But I also make it a point to find out who funds these studies and this one was underwritten by a left coast think tank or foundation managed by a guy out of UC-Berkeley, so I'm not sure who got what for the money.

---

That Bangladesh "study" was a total sham. Many people want masks to work in preventing Covid 19. It's just not the case. And using anecdotal non controlled observations in hospitals will not make it true as well.

Since everyone loves to post tweets by Vinay Prasad, here is his article on the Bangladesh study on masks.

Vinay Prasad Article

In all the years I was at NIH, the ethics of their clinical studies was guided by the overriding principle of "informed consent" of the patient. It seems that overnight, NIH's vaunted ethics went right into the dumpster.

When will the people who have gotten the vaccine admit that they were played? I mean if you genuinely feel it was best, great. But damn, quit trying to force the **** on everyone else.

The goal posts keep moving and people are suckers for it. At first it was you only need one shot, then it was two, now it's boosters. I mean come on man. I get most of us on here are college educated but did we not miss out on the critical thinking classes?

Jtbridges317 said:

---

When will the people who have gotten the vaccine admit that they were played? I mean if you genuinely feel it was best, great. But damn, quit trying to force the **** on everyone else.

The goal posts keep moving and people are suckers for it. At first it was you only need one shot, then it was two, now it's boosters. I mean come on man. I get most of us on here are college educated but did we not miss out on the critical thinking classes?

---

Idk, man. That's tough. Who lacked the critical thinking? Those who "got played" into accepting a vaccine that has allowed Davie to post such favorable data, or those who didn't understand the actions of respiratory viruses enough to be somehow perplexed that treatment and vaccine effectiveness/ immunity may wane such that boosters or infection spikes would be predictable? I just think the people who failed to recognize that a coronavirus would act in such a manner and couldn't see this coming were either blinded by bias or lacked understanding. Maybe both groups lack critical thinking in their own rite?

Fun fact: Between 100-200 United States Congress Members (plus many of their staffers & family members) with COVID.. were treated by a colleague over the past 15 months with ivermectin & the I-MASK+ protocol at https://t.co/OvU8SLfLJq. None have gone to hospital. Just sayin'

— Pierre Kory, MD MPA (@PierreKory) October 8, 2021

Our numbers are slowly dropping (about 150 admitted down to about 120) and electives are opening back up over the next 2 wks. Yeah baby.

Nearly all of congress is also vaccinated. But yeah, it's probably the horse dewormer.

Maybe somebody can find a better number, but according to what i could find as of oct 1 only 85 federal officials have been diagnosed with covid. 100-200 have had it? And ALL chose to be treated with I-MASK+ I'm assuming to get numbers that high?

Interestingly, Pierre just got covid from his daughter despite MASK prophylaxis

MATH+, according to his own tweets, isn't working

MASK+ appears to be significantly more expensive than even the most expensive vaccine available and requires you to take 6 pills/day for the life of the pandemic

MASK+ recommends mask use

mrcpack17 said:

---

Nearly all of congress is also vaccinated. But yeah, it's probably the horse dewormer.

---

Hell, even WebMD has instructions for humans to take Ivermectin... in other words take your horse dewormer comment and stick it up your A$$!!

https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-1122/ivermectin-oral/details