Rigorous international study of N95 masks upends federal COVID narrative
(justthenews.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
No one knows who u/Pegases is and the article they link to is unsigned, so this is another claim by anonymous people.
Don't get your medical advice from anonymous people on social media folks.
Here's the study the article links to: https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M22-1966
If you look it over you'll see that they are not testing the effectiveness of masks overall - there would have to be a control group with no masks in order to test that. They are just comparing the two face coverings, and they find that they perform about the same, with a slight edge going to the N95s.
"In the intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR–confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 52 of 497 (10.46%) participants in the medical mask group versus 47 of 507 (9.27%) in the N95 respirator group."
"In conclusion, among health care workers who provided routine care to patients with COVID-19, the overall estimates rule out a doubling in hazard of RT-PCR–confirmed COVID-19 for medical masks when compared with HRs of RT-PCR–confirmed COVID-19 for N95 respirators."
So this study is telling the same tale as others. For example: 2022 Oct 22 "Our findings indicate that both respirators and medical masks provide a high as-worn bioaerosol protection efficacy against virus containing aerosols, and therefore, a very high protection against airborne diseases. Considering the higher comfort, better availability, and lower price of medical masks in contrast to respirators, it is recommendable to use medical face masks especially in low risk situations and in general public." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36317154/
since we already know that regular masks are ineffective, that fact that the filtered n95 masks did not perform any better was a bit unexpected. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
and seeing covid has had 10% of the world's population in infections, It would be statistically average that 10% of the participants got an infection. And since they were all wearing masks, and their chances were still on par, therefore masks no work, thanks for playing.
also you skipped this line in the study "The observed results are consistent with a range of protection, from a 23% reduction in the HR with medical masks to a 69% risk increase."
Nothing about covid in that link folks. Read it yourself. Don't take the word of anonymous strangers on social media.
but the study you posted wasn't the current strain, so it too is therefor unable to be used as a analog for other similar viruses.
also only the first paragraph was about the study I posted, the other two were about the original study of discussion.
Clutching at straws,folks. One study was about covid, the other was not.
Unfortunately they have nothing to back up the rest. It's like they think they can out-science the scientists without doing any science.
Folks, cherry-picking a line out of the study doesn't change its conclusion.
still not wearing it. sorry
Of course not. You're an independent thinker who comes to your own conclusions.
"If you’re not a scientist, and you disagree with scientists about science, it’s actually not a disagreement. You’re just wrong." - somebody on the Internet.
Hi Dumbass can you respond to this one too?