The notion that science has determined that masks are going to save us from Chinese Coronavirus (or any other disease) is utter tosh. Anyone telling you science is settled on any issue should raise a red flag. On masks, science isn't close to settled.
The British Journal of Medicine says cloth masks are 97% useless.
A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers
A study of the more serious 1918 flu pandemic showed masks useless.
The American Journal of Public Health (AJPH) from the American Public Health Association (APHA) publications
Another study shows cloth masks useless compared to surgical masks.
A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers
Other studies show cloth masks useless compared to surgical masks, even the latter are questionable. They include:
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/23/2/23_61/_pdf/-char/en
Error - Cookies Turned Off
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf
https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/0195-6701(91)90148-2/pdf
Simple Respiratory Protection—Evaluation of the Filtration Performance of Cloth Masks and Common Fabric Materials Against 20–1000 nm Size Particles
Masks are associated with oxygen deprivation and increased rates of infection according to these studies:
[Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance] - PubMed
"Exercise with facemask; Are we handling a devil's sword?" - A physiological hypothesis - PubMed
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30169507/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15340662/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26579222/
A 2015 British study on surgical masks revealed masks don't really protect patient or surgeon very much. And that's in sterile settings.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar...-KkzpdkmzltnAf-GXp7gMeQkkyeZJ6gEs7G5h8PHln_R0
Finally, one New England Journal of Medicine editorial acknowledged the uselessness of masks but demanded universal masking nonetheless less for its placebo effect.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372
There is plenty of evidence out there that masks and mask mandates aren't working and in fact are causing harm. They're a placebo to make you think you're protected and to make politicians look like they're doing something when they're in reality doing nothing.
Do your own research.
There is plenty of evidence out there that masks and mask mandates aren't working and in fact are causing harm.
Where's the evidence? There is not any evidence in your post.
First, masks are advocated because wearing a mask reduces the transmission of COVID by trapping the respiratory droplets and aerosol of the person wearing the mask. Of course, the mask may not trap every respiratory droplet or all aerosol but the mask, certain masks, do trap a substantial amount of respiratory droplets and aerosols. The aforementioned reduction in respiratory droplets and aerosols leads to a significant decrease in the risk of the virus spreading from the person wearing the mask to another person or people. To understand this qualitative difference in risk, and appreciate it, a comparison to the amount of respiratory droplets and aerosols released without a mask in relation to the use of a mask, and certain kinds of masks, illuminates the efficacy of masks and certain masks.
https://www.understandinganimalrese...educe-covid-19-transmission-between-hamsters/
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/23/health/covid-mask-layers-wellness/index.html
https://www.wthr.com/article/news/i...d-19/531-96479b50-7041-4f95-a88c-e33e2355fa37
https://www.wflx.com/2020/07/13/n-cloth-masks-are-most-effective-test-finds/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/petri-dishes-coughed-on-mask/
As a result, the person/people wearing a mask reduces the risk of spreading any infected respiratory droplets or aerosols from themselves to another person. The use of the mask is not to keep viral particles out from an infected person but rather to reduce the escape of viral particles from the person wearing the mask. Consequently, the risk of the person wearing a mask and infecting someone else is considerably, palpably reduced. With this in mind, let's look at your links.
1. British Journal of Medicine-the study pertains to the use of cloth masks to protect the person wearing the mask from infection by someone else. The use of cloth masks today is done to protect other people from the person wearing the mask. This study looks at a factual scenario which is not applicable to the use of cloth masks today for COVID.
2. American Journal of Public Health (1918 pandemic and mask use). The study looked at the use of gauze masks! I am not aware of anyone running around with gauze masks to reduce the spread of COVID.
3. Jstage link-Looking at the diagram they used for their experiment, and the study itself, once again this is a study focusing upon the efficacy of the mask to protect the person wearing the mask from infection by someone who is infected.
4. The online library/wiley study has the same flaw as 1 and 3.
5. The abstract for journal of hospital infection says it all. "
Following the commissioning of a new suite of operating rooms air movement studies showed a flow of air away from the operating table towards the periphery of the room. Oral microbial flora dispersed by unmasked male and female volunteers standing one metre from the table failed to contaminate exposed settle plates placed on the table. The wearing of face masks by non-scrubbed staff working in an operating room with forced ventilation seems to be unnecessary." The very language of the abstract creates a suggestion that weakens your argument regarding masks!
I am not going to waste my time disposing of the rest of your links. I want to say, however, I am not commenting upon the quality of the studies. Rather, each study examined the mask as a form of protection for the person wearing the masks, which is inapplicable to and does not address the use of masks to reduce the risk of COVID by limiting the respiratory droplets/aerosols emitted by the person wearing the mask as opposed to providing protection to the person wearing the mask. The problem is not necessarily the studies but your poor use of them.
Moving on to your links regarding oxygen and masks.
1. PubMed: "Wearing a surgical mask modifies significantly and clinically dyspnea without influencing walked distance." Dyspnea-shortness of breath. So what? Strenuous workouts also produce dyspnea. This link is informational but not an indictment against the use of masks.
2. Generally, the links discussing possible infection because the mask is contaminated is not an indictment against the use of masks. Rather, the studies highlight what experts have been saying all along, the masks must be used appropriately, discarded appropriately, and proper hand washing is needed after discarding the mask.
3. British study of surgical facemask use for surgery, stated, "
Examination of the literature revealed much of the published work on the matter to be quite dated and often studies had poorly elucidated methodologies. As a result, we recommend caution in extrapolating their findings to contemporary surgical practice. However, overall there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.
More rigorous contemporary research is needed to make a definitive comment on the effectiveness of surgical facemasks."
In other words, the study you are citing is explicitly telling you that the efficacy of a surgical mask for use in a surgery setting to protect surgeon or patient from contamination is lacking and needs to be properly researched.
4. "Finally, one New England Journal of Medicine editorial acknowledged the uselessness of masks but demanded universal masking nonetheless less for its placebo effect." This is absolutely not what this journal said. The journal made several pertinent remarks to the use of masks and COVID. One of those remarks being, "
We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic."
The italicized commentary is not an assertion masks are useless. Rather, what was stated was the risk of contracting COVID "from a passing interaction in a public space" is minimal, and as a result, the risk being so low already, the use of a mask is pointless in such a scenario. The
comment does not speak upon the efficacy of masks in general or in other contexts!
In addition, the journal is merely venturing its own opinion! After all, this is a part of the journal called "Perspective," where these doctors give their perception without much if any supporting data. The doctor's in the link are expressing their personal beliefs with no supporting evidence except to note the prevalence of asymptomatic and pre-symptom COVID patients/people and how likely they transmit the virus. Otherwise, this link is just a few doctors telling us what they think personally.
The notion that science has determined that masks are going to save us from Chinese Coronavirus (or any other disease) is utter tosh. Anyone telling you science is settled on any issue should raise a red flag. On masks, science isn't close to settled.
The "utter tosh" has been your improper use of the evidence and links. The "utter tosh" is your Strawman argument masks will "save us from" COVID. The "utter tosh" has been your entire post.