Do masks work? Short answer, no.

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).”

nypost.com...

Well, we had a few years of 2 weeks to flatten the curve. We were forced to mask up, but the type of mask was never important. Wait, what? The type of mask didn't matter? Aren't they vastly different? Well, yes they are. For instance, KN-95 masks are very efficient as keeping small particles from being inhaled. Masks made in the sewing lady's spare bedroom out of old fabric she didn't use for her grandchild's doll dress aren't KN-95 quality. I'm sure she sews well, and the masks look lovely.

I mean, who can forget this lovely stroll down memory lane.


Masks were much more of a symbol. But a symbol of what? Of your obedience? Of your compassion? Of your willingness to go with the flow?
But still today, with the data being manipulated, when you search for studies on masks, they continue to flop out the old "CDC Approved studies" that all give the answer they were commissioned to give. Just in case the entire fiasco is planned to be repeated suddenly happens again by accident.

Why would I bring up this idiotic topic well after the pandemic is over? Well, voting season is coming, and the conspiracy nut in me just can't let go of the idea that they need one more helping hand in the election process. If a sudden surge of the deadly (turns out not deadly at all) virus was to emerge, we may have to all vote from home again, have the DNC collect ballots, and give the approved one's to mules so they can drop them off 5-10 at a time in various drop boxes. I hear they have about 81 million to deliver.

a reply to: network dude

A symbol of stupidity.
The joke is on us, we were duped.


I’ll just leave this here……

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses - LINK

Peer-Reviewed Study Shows “Little To No Difference” In Preventing COVID, Flu Infection With Masks - LINK

The New York Times Explains Why Mask Mandates Don’t Work - LINK - LINK

a reply to: RazorV66

I would bet good money that a DERP will happen along and argue that masks do work, then post the meme of the guy pissing himself.

a reply to: network dude

Isn’t that the deranged Leftist, D-List actress Alyssa Milano in that picture?

a reply to: RazorV66

Yes, sporting her knitted mask her Nana made for her.

a reply to: network dude


Masks work, if you're trained to use them correctly. Masks work if they are changed out frequently. N95 masks are 95% effective, hence the "95" in the name.

Maybe 1% of the population knows how to use masks correctly. They are doctors, nurses, medical professionals.

They know not to touch their face while wearing a mask, they know how to breathe and even cough in a mask.

The 99% who don't? They are actually making themselves sicker, creating biological petri dishes right against their faces.

Masks during covid waas nothing more than an exercise in obedience.

a reply to: DBCowboy

exactly. I tried to find the pictures of Fauci wearing his red sox t-shirt material mask he was so fond of, but had to settle for this one. But if you wear two of them......

a reply to: network dude

The CDC has already admitted it in their own clueless way -

a reply to: network dude

I guess it depends on which sources you choose to believe. There are MANY published studies from very reputable sources that say that although masks will never work 100% in PREVENTING the spread. It does help slow the spread across a population for sure.

Actual masks though, not the fashion statement masks in the photo...ha ha....

a reply to: network dude

I've always seen masks as a way to reduce the chance of transmitting diseases. Which is something that you want during a pandemic.

a reply to: network dude

Anticipating the rush, I ordered mine last week.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I have used every mask in the above picture DB in different industries and the first thing I noticed was what about the eyes and ears , That is where a infection would get in first , But Bill Gates of hell and his warning where he laughed with his then wife at Wait till the next one hits !!!!! ..


We might need a NCB suit this time round

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: network dude

I've always seen masks as a way to reduce the chance of transmitting diseases. Which is something that you want during a pandemic.

and if the disease was only airborne, wearing a fan on your head would do a much better job. But gravity had a say in things, and the masks just didn't make the cut. But if you chose to wear one, don't stop there, they say two is better.

originally posted by: network dude

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).”

nypost.com...

Well, we had a few years of 2 weeks to flatten the curve. We were forced to mask up, but the type of mask was never important. Wait, what? The type of mask didn't matter? Aren't they vastly different? Well, yes they are. For instance, KN-95 masks are very efficient as keeping small particles from being inhaled. Masks made in the sewing lady's spare bedroom out of old fabric she didn't use for her grandchild's doll dress aren't KN-95 quality. I'm sure she sews well, and the masks look lovely.

I mean, who can forget this lovely stroll down memory lane.

Masks were much more of a symbol. But a symbol of what? Of your obedience? Of your compassion? Of your willingness to go with the flow?
But still today, with the data being manipulated, when you search for studies on masks, they continue to flop out the old "CDC Approved studies" that all give the answer they were commissioned to give. Just in case the entire fiasco is planned to be repeated suddenly happens again by accident.

Why would I bring up this idiotic topic well after the pandemic is over? Well, voting season is coming, and the conspiracy nut in me just can't let go of the idea that they need one more helping hand in the election process. If a sudden surge of the deadly (turns out not deadly at all) virus was to emerge, we may have to all vote from home again, have the DNC collect ballots, and give the approved one's to mules so they can drop them off 5-10 at a time in various drop boxes. I hear they have about 81 million to deliver.

One of the indicators that an article published in the right-wing echo chamber is actually just propaganda is when they don't publish a link to the original article on which the article is based. Fox News does that a lot, the Russian RT network does that a lot, and now NY Post has done it. Basically, these sources simply publish an article with a headline that tells you what to believe and then don't provide any contextual information that might be contrary to their position. If you want to see whether they are biased or not, you have to go digging for additional information, and they don't make that easy.

In this case, I think this is the article that was referred to in the NY Post and was originally published back in January of 2023:

www.cochranelibrary.com...

Here's a statement that was published a couple of months later by Cochrane regarding that article:

"Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.

It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive. Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask-wearing itself reduces people's risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses.

The review authors are clear on the limitations in the abstract: 'The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions.' Adherence in this context refers to the number of people who actually wore the provided masks when encouraged to do so as part of the intervention. For example, in the most heavily-weighted trial of interventions to promote community mask wearing, 42.3% of people in the intervention arm wore masks compared to 13.3% of those in the control arm.

The original Plain Language Summary for this review stated that 'We are uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses based on the studies we assessed.' This wording was open to misinterpretation, for which we apologize. While scientific evidence is never immune to misinterpretation, we take responsibility for not making the wording clearer from the outset. We are engaging with the review authors with the aim of updating the Plain Language Summary and abstract to make clear that the review looked at whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses."

In other words, wearing high quality masks might very well physically inhibit the spread of respiratory illnesses, if enough of the population actually does it. Simply scolding people to wear high quality masks doesn't mean that many people will actually do it.

originally posted by: stonerwilliam
a reply to: DBCowboy

I have used every mask in the above picture DB in different industries and the first thing I noticed was what about the eyes and ears , That is where a infection would get in first , But Bill Gates of hell and his warning where he laughed with his then wife at Wait till the next one hits !!!!! .

.


We might need a NCB suit this time round

I think treating it like the flu would be the winner here. I mean, we were able to eliminate the flu from hurting anyone for an entire season. We really are amazing.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: network dude

I've always seen masks as a way to reduce the chance of transmitting diseases. Which is something that you want during a pandemic.

Do you actually believe that video?

The dude is clearly spitting in the image without the mask. Who spits when they breathe? Additionally, how do we now what he was doing with the 3 images of masks on? He’s got masks on and his face is covered.I highly doubt he was spitting into the masks as it would be all over his face.

a reply to: DAVID64

I already have mine.

a reply to: 1947boomer

are you going to post the guy pissing his pants meme now?

The ratio between the covid virus and a face mask is the same as a football in relation to a goal.