UK face coverings discussion

[DB]

It’s interesting that reference 2 in your post contains a link to a paper that provides a level of evidence that goes beyond what you allow for - https://www.authorea.com/doi/full/10.22541/au.158809415.52483068

So far as I can see from a quick look, that paper claims that the studies to which it is referrring are flawed because they look at whether masks protect the wearer when it should be whether they protect others in the community.

It seems to ignore the most obvious point here - whether they protect the wearer from catching it, or help prevent them from spreading it, the result should be the same if masks are effective - namely a decrease in case numbers where masks are worn in public settings. I have not seen any evidence that this has happened anywhere.

Statements such as

Mathematical modelling suggests that a mask that is 60% effective at blocking viral transmission and is worn by 60% of the population will reduce R0 to below 1.0

As noted above, if 60% of people wear a mask that is 60% effective, this is likely to be sufficient to substantially reduce the transmission of Sars-CoV-2.

do not appear to be backed up by statistics from any country - if masks were effective, even at a considerably lower percentage than that, it would be observeable in the stats, which isn't the case.

 

[35B]

So far as I can see from a quick look, that paper claims that the studies to which it is referrring are flawed because they look at whether masks protect the wearer when it should be whether they protect others in the community.

It seems to ignore the most obvious point here - whether they protect the wearer from catching it, or help prevent them from spreading it, the result should be the same if masks are effective - namely a decrease in case numbers where masks are worn in public settings. I have not seen any evidence that this has happened anywhere.

Statements such as



do not appear to be backed up by statistics from any country - if masks were effective, even at a considerably lower percentage than that, it would be observeable in the stats, which isn't the case.

It includes, from the very quick glance I gave it, reference to comparisons between Austrian and Czech lockdowns, but with differently timed imposition of mask wearing. That suggests - and I take the statement as found - an effect on transmission

 

[Scotrail12]

Time for mandatory masks indoors to be scrapped. At this point, I don't think these pieces of cloth are making a blind bit of difference. Probably different when it comes to medical masks but those are far and few between and quite rightly belong in medical settings.

 

[DB]

It includes, from the very quick glance I gave it, reference to comparisons between Austrian and Czech lockdowns, but with differently timed imposition of mask wearing. That suggests - and I take the statement as found - an effect on transmission

What ither measures were imposed At the same time?

 

[_toommm_]

Another TM saying that people must carry an exemption card. How hard is it really for TOCs to get TMs to read from the same sheet? Makes me cringe every time you get staff challenging people without a mask - I know I certainly wouldn’t.

 

[35B]

What ither measures were imposed At the same time?

I referred to a quick read of the article, and a statement therein.

 

[DustyBin]

It’s interesting that reference 2 in your post contains a link to a paper that provides a level of evidence that goes beyond what you allow for - https://www.authorea.com/doi/full/10.22541/au.158809415.52483068

I'll be honest I hadn't looked at the linked articles, however Trisha Greenhalgh has written more than one paper in support of face coverings which in turn have been rebutted by a number of researchers. My own view is that she relies heavily on 'mathmatical modelling' as @DavidB points out and assumptions regarding efficacy, often based on best case scenarios which bear little relevance to the real world.

I posted a link to this paper the other day which discusses some of the issues with cloth face coverings (in a medical setting):

A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers | BMJ Open

The physical properties of a cloth mask, reuse, the frequency and effectiveness of cleaning, and increased moisture retention, may potentially increase the infection risk for HCWs. The virus may survive on the surface of the facemasks,29and modelling studies have quantified the contamination levels of masks.30 Self-contamination through repeated use and improper doffing is possible. For example, a contaminated cloth mask may transfer pathogen from the mask to the bare hands of the wearer. We also showed that filtration was extremely poor (almost 0%) for the cloth masks. Observations during SARS suggested double-masking and other practices increased the risk of infection because of moisture, liquid diffusion and pathogen retention.31These effects may be associated with cloth masks.

 

[Yew]

Trisha Greenhalgh has written more than one paper in support of face coverings which in turn have been rebutted by a number of researchers.

Quite simply, her view of 'act now, find evidence later' is some of the most anti-scientific garbage that we've had foisted upon us through out this whole situation.

 

[big_rig]

Quite simply, her view of 'act now, find evidence later' is some of the most anti-scientific garbage that we've had foisted upon us through out this whole situation.

She has also done 'peer reviewed' research into 'long covid' which as far as I could tell involved asking people on Twitter and Facebook who had signed up to various groups what they thought of it, and then asked for peer reviewers from her Twitter followers. About as far from what I understood science to be as possible Even worse than this seemingly endless trend of 'meta analysis' where one doesn't do any science but just picks and chooses from existing stuff to fit a pre-determined narrative - bonus points for when somebody else then cites you meta analysis in their own meta analysis!

 

[Yew]

She has also done 'peer reviewed' research into 'long covid' which as far as I could tell involved asking people on Twitter and Facebook who had signed up to various groups what they thought of it, and then asked for peer reviewers from her Twitter followers. About as far from what I understood science to be as possible Even worse than this seemingly endless trend of 'meta analysis' where one doesn't do any science but just picks and chooses from existing stuff to fit a pre-determined narrative - bonus points for when somebody else then cites you meta analysis in their own meta analysis!

Is that the one Francois Balloux was complaining about, no control group, no indication of the sample size, and no actual medical measurements?


The number of "studies" that I've seen that regurgitate the same old papers, but omitting all of the caveats and conditionality from the papers to fit the mask narrative is

 

[big_rig]

Is that the one Francois Balloux was complaining about, no control group, no indication of the sample size, and no actual medical measurements?


The number of "studies" that I've seen that regurgitate the same old papers, but omitting all of the caveats and conditionality from the papers to fit the mask narrative is

Probably! I had a flick through it and it gave no indication as to whether any of these people had ever tested positive or were just hypochondriacs, or suffering from a regular cold or flu. Just a bunch of quotes from people on Facebook wrapped up as a 'scientific paper.' Dire stuff given by their calculations there ought to be, oh give or take, only about a hundred million people on the planet suffering from this

 

[Bikeman78]

What I am personally pondering is what will happen once face coverings cease to be legally mandatory – I fully expect some businesses to keep up the requirement as a house rule. Some, such as Apple and Disney stores, had one before the law came in on 24 July.

Disney even expects five year olds to wear masks. I won't be going there again until they relax that rule.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Disney even expects five year olds to wear masks. I won't be going there again until they relax that rule.

So does the Scottish Government!

 

[DustyBin]

@Yew and @big_rig I’m pleased it’s not only me that researches this stuff! You’re absolutely correct, it is very poor ‘science’ (I use the term loosely).

 

[Bikeman78]

So does the Scottish Government!

Wow. Didn't know that. Does that apply to all places that adults have to wear them?

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Wow. Didn't know that. Does that apply to all places that adults have to wear them?

Yeah. Only exempt if 4 or under (as well as the other exemptions, of course).

However, only secondary school kids need to wear them in corridors/communual areas.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Yeah. Only exempt if 4 or under (as well as the other exemptions, of course).

However, only secondary school kids need to wear them in corridors/communual areas.

Why are they not required in classrooms? Either you mandate them everywhere indoors in schools, or you just don't mandate them.

 

[island]

Disney even expects five year olds to wear masks. I won't be going there again until they relax that rule.

Disney stores do although the Paris theme park has the cut off at 11.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Why are they not required in classrooms? Either you mandate them everywhere indoors in schools, or you just don't mandate them.

More scope for physical distancing apparently. And less mixing of kids (which is a load of bravo sierra).

 

[big_rig]

@Yew and @big_rig I’m pleased it’s not only me that researches this stuff! You’re absolutely correct, it is very poor ‘science’ (I use the term loosely).

Ironically just as of this morning she has released a new 'paper' which to my eye looks more like a blog post or Wikipedia article than a piece of scientific research. It is more of the same: 'summary of evidence,' 'meta analysis,' 'an interesting hypothesis..' etc etc. I can't think of any charitable reason for why these people keep on pumping these out. It even says that 'many millions' have died from Covid which is blatantly false.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/wuk6a

Masks and face coverings for the lay public: A narrative update

 

[LAX54]

We have all been advsied that when a mask gets 'damp', it becomes a lot less effective, as the dampness can transfer the virus, so, what about when it rains, like it has done recently? I have seen people with very soggy masks ! but of course not even thinking is this working or not ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Here's an odd one.

For the past few weeks I seem to have had mild (presumably viral) conjunctivitis in one eye. I've not been to the doctors for it as it's going away on its own, it's almost gone today.

I wonder if I could have picked that up while handling my used mask?

 

[Class800]

yes quite likely

 

[greyman42]

I was on a York to London LNER service yesterday and a lady announced that anyone not wearing a mask or not wearing it correctly WILL be fined £100. How she was going to do that was beyond me as she did not appear to even walk through the train.

 

[island]

Any £100 fines issued would in any event be void as it went up to £200 a few weeks ago.

 

[DustyBin]

Ironically just as of this morning she has released a new 'paper' which to my eye looks more like a blog post or Wikipedia article than a piece of scientific research. It is more of the same: 'summary of evidence,' 'meta analysis,' 'an interesting hypothesis..' etc etc. I can't think of any charitable reason for why these people keep on pumping these out. It even says that 'many millions' have died from Covid which is blatantly false.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/wuk6a

Thanks, I've just had a quick read and it's really not a scientific article as you say. Her conclusion is unneccessarily verbose and should simply state "I believe masks could be of benefit but I can't find any evidence".

Here's an odd one.

For the past few weeks I seem to have had mild (presumably viral) conjunctivitis in one eye. I've not been to the doctors for it as it's going away on its own, it's almost gone today.

I wonder if I could have picked that up while handling my used mask?

It's quite possible. You are trapping pathogens in a piece of fabric which is attached to you face but I think the greater risk is from handling the mask and then rubbing your eyes as you suggest.

Incidentally I carried out a little experiment of my own last night, the result of which supports what many of us keep saying regarding masks harbouring pathogens. I keep a fabric mask in my glove compartment which I generally only wear for short periods of time and wash once a week on average. I ended up wearing it for a couple of hours yesterday so I brought it in with me so I could put it in the washing machine. Before I did so however, I poured a small amount of H2O2 onto it (aka hydrogen peroxide) at 3% strength. The wetted area fizzed away nicely, indicating the presence of pathogens on the fabric (it is the oxidisation of these pathogens which causes the fizzing for those not familiar!). I've obviously no idea what kind of pathogens were being destroyed, it could have been any kind of virus, bacteria, fungi etc. but they were present. As I'm writing this I've conducted the same test on the freshly laundered mask and there was no reaction so at least the washing machine did it's job.

End of science lesson!

 

[DB]

Thanks, I've just had a quick read and it's really not a scientific article as you say. Her conclusion is unneccessarily verbose and should simply state "I believe masks could be of benefit but I can't find any evidence".



It's quite possible. You are trapping pathogens in a piece of fabric which is attached to you face but I think the greater risk is from handling the mask and then rubbing your eyes as you suggest.

Incidentally I carried out a little experiment of my own last night, the result of which supports what many of us keep saying regarding masks harbouring pathogens. I keep a fabric mask in my glove compartment which I generally only wear for short periods of time and wash once a week on average. I ended up wearing it for a couple of hours yesterday so I brought it in with me so I could put it in the washing machine. Before I did so however, I poured a small amount of H2O2 onto it (aka hydrogen peroxide) at 3% strength. The wetted area fizzed away nicely, indicating the presence of pathogens on the fabric (it is the oxidisation of these pathogens which causes the fizzing for those not familiar!). I've obviously no idea what kind of pathogens were being destroyed, it could have been any kind of virus, bacteria, fungi etc. but they were present. As I'm writing this I've conducted the same test on the freshly laundered mask and there was no reaction so at least the washing machine did it's job.

End of science lesson!

Now try it on an unused disposale one! Would be interesting to know how that fares!

 

[bramling]

Here's an odd one.

For the past few weeks I seem to have had mild (presumably viral) conjunctivitis in one eye. I've not been to the doctors for it as it's going away on its own, it's almost gone today.

I wonder if I could have picked that up while handling my used mask?

They certainly cause things like chin spots. I wonder if that could be regarded as a cause of severe distress, given the negative impact on mental health that can cause? (and, yes, I’m being completely serious - it’s highly selfish for everything to be focussed on Covid).

 

[DB]

Went into M&S Food an hour or so ago on my way past. Challenged by woman on the door:
"have you got a mask"
"I am exempt"
"have you got any proof"

At which point, I informed her that there is no requirement for proof, and walked out and went to Tesco instead. I've just contacted M&S customer services via their online chat and they have assured me that this isn't a new company policy and it won't happen again. We shall see I guess.

 

[DustyBin]

Now try it on an unused disposale one! Would be interesting to know how that fares!

Duly done! There was no visible or audible reaction so that particular disposable seemed fine. Mind you it's been in it's unopened packaging for months so I would expect it to be sterile by now....