If we are to follow science....

[The Barbarian]

This has been the mantra but I want everyone here to notice that when ever someone says this, governors or anonymous people on the internet, they don't provide the "research".

Here you go:
effectiveness of masks covid - Search Results - PubMed

Just under a thousand hits. Lots of research. In the literature, not some politically-motivated blog.

Masks merely reduce the amount of virus a person breathes out, trapping it in the cloth. And it happens by adhesion to fibers.

No evidence.

In a study by Milton et al. [24], they have investigated the effects of using surgical masks in preventing the aerosols influenza transmission. The obtained results indicated that surgical masks had prevented the viral detection aerosols by 25-fold for the coarse aerosols, and 2.5-fold for the fine particles, hence, generally 3.4-fold reduction was reported for the exhaled aerosols. In consequence, the surgical masks can limit the release of the droplets larger than 5 μm.
An overview of filtration efficiency through the masks: Mechanisms of the aerosols penetration - ScienceDirect

We collected samples of exhaled particles (one with and one without a facemask) in two size fractions (“coarse”>5 µm, “fine”≤5 µm) from 37 volunteers within 5 days of seasonal influenza onset, measured viral copy number using quantitative RT-PCR, and tested the fine-particle fraction for culturable virus.

Fine particles contained 8.8 (95% CI 4.1 to 19) fold more viral copies than did coarse particles. Surgical masks reduced viral copy numbers in the fine fraction by 2.8 fold (95% CI 1.5 to 5.2) and in the coarse fraction by 25 fold (95% CI 3.5 to 180). Overall, masks produced a 3.4 fold (95% CI 1.8 to 6.3) reduction in viral aerosol shedding. Correlations between nasopharyngeal swab and the aerosol fraction copy numbers were weak (r = 0.17, coarse; r = 0.29, fine fraction). Copy numbers in exhaled breath declined rapidly with day after onset of illness. Two subjects with the highest copy numbers gave culture positive fine particle samples.

Surgical masks worn by patients reduce aerosols shedding of virus. The abundance of viral copies in fine particle aerosols and evidence for their infectiousness suggests an important role in seasonal influenza transmission. Monitoring exhaled virus aerosols will be important for validation of experimental transmission studies in humans.
Influenza Virus Aerosols in Human Exhaled Breath: Particle Size, Culturability, and Effect of Surgical Masks

You've been misled, most likely because you're avoided the actual sites for such literature. Go to the source directly. And I get that a lot of political shaming against mask-wearing goes on. I'm sorry if that embarrasses you.

Also note the political shaming that occurs, not reasoning, not facts, just shaming.

Yep. A lot of "if you're afraid just hide in your house" stuff. Or "if you wear a mask, you're a sheeple."
We get that. Why would you even care what brainwashed people like that say?

And to the contrary, NOT wearing a mask is what is politically incorrect.

Nice try. But we've already seen all that stuff. Check out the post just above mine. And that's not even the most childish stuff. Put the politics aside and look at the science.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The info at that link shows no discernible differences between wearing and not wearing masks. However, feel free to wear one.

That only pertains to tiny particles that are able to pass through the mask. What about larger sized phlegm? If the mask catches any of it then it lessened the chances of spread. Tiny particles will dry out a lot more quickly killing the virus the larger the phlegm or saliva the longer the virus can survive on a surface.

 

[The Barbarian]

That only pertains to tiny particles that are able to pass through the mask. What about larger sized phlegm? If the mask catches any of it then it lessened the chances of spread. Tiny particles will dry out a lot more quickly killing the virus the larger the phlegm or saliva the longer the virus can survive on a surface.

Right. It doesn't stop infections, it reduces the number of infections, by lowering the amount of the virus that's breathed out into the air.

Doesn't seem like a difficult concept, does it?

 

[Direct Driver]

Nice try. But we've already seen all that stuff. Check out the post just above mine. And that's not even the most childish stuff. Put the politics aside and look at the science.

The problem is that it has become politicized. And it had to be, otherwise there would have been no lockdowns or mask mandates. Those are political actions. Lots of small businesses wiped out. Lots of people lost their livelihood, for unscientific nonsense.

And yes, as I pointed out years ago (on other forums) the battle today is not democrat vs republican, labor party vs unionist party. It is nationalists vs globalists. And nationalists were winning. Hence the election of trump, Brexit, etc. I see this virus nonsense as globalism's last big hurrah. That silly global warming thing fizzled, and now this is fizzling. They desperately need some sort of worldwide emergency serious enough to take total control, but every time it gets exposed as just another attempt to jump the shark.

And now this: Boris Says Vaccine Passports Will be 'Feature of Our Life in the Fututre'

You had better believe this is not about science, but about politics.

 

[The Barbarian]

Here is what OSHA states about cloth face coverings and surgical masks:
"Are not considered personal protective equipment (PPE).”

That's an OSHA rule, regarding chemical contaminants. There are very specific respirator requirements fo OSHA makes no such determinations; they make rules about determinations for workplaces. The technical work is done by NIOSH. Here's what NIOSH says:

The role of facemasks is for patient source control, to prevent contamination of the surrounding area when a person coughs or sneezes.  Patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 should wear a facemask until they are isolated in a hospital or at home. The patient does not need to wear a facemask while isolated.
Healthcare Workers

 

[BNR32FAN]

Are Face Masks Effective? The Evidence.

There are studies both for and against the effectiveness of wearing masks. From what I’ve seen the studies against mask effectiveness aren’t taking into account larger bodies of phlegm and saliva that can exit the mouth enabling the virus to survive longer on a surface which can result in a longer contamination period for any surface that these larger bodies come in contact with.

 

[Direct Driver]

That only pertains to tiny particles that are able to pass through the mask. What about larger sized phlegm? If the mask catches any of it then it lessened the chances of spread. Tiny particles will dry out a lot more quickly killing the virus the larger the phlegm or saliva the longer the virus can survive on a surface.

What about the stuff that goes around the mask?

BTW, I've worn a mask less than two hours total since this thing started a year ago. Even on a three hour flight from Denver I was able to very slowly munch peanuts almost the whole flight so I didn't have to wear a mask. The Karens a couple of rows up were furious, but there was nothing they could do.

And I've sneezed and coughed while wearing a mask. Of course, I took it off before I did. Duh.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Right. It doesn't stop infections, it reduces the number of infections, by lowering the amount of the virus that's breathed out into the air.

Doesn't seem like a difficult concept, does it?

No it’s like saying that seatbelts don’t protect people in a car accident because x amount of people died while wearing their seat belt. It’s not meant to be a guarantee it’s meant to help lessen the chance. There’s studies both in support of masks and against them. People are just ignoring common sense and choosing what their “itchy ears” want to hear.

 

[The Barbarian]

The problem is that it has become politicized. And it had to be, otherwise there would have been no lockdowns or mask mandates. Those are political actions. Lots of small businesses wiped out. Lots of people lost their livelihood, for unscientific nonsense.

Yes. If we had promptly gone to testing, mask mandates, and distancing, we'd have suffered fewer deaths, and less economic pain. No point in wringing our hands over the botched response; now we have the reality to deal with.

And yes, as I pointed out years ago (on other forums) the battle today is not democrat vs republican, labor party vs unionist party. It is nationalists vs globalists. And nationalists were winning. Hence the election of trump, Brexit, etc.

Notice that the UK (voting for Brexit) did a much better job than the Trump administration, so politics seems to have been less important than competence.

I see this virus nonsense as globalism's last big hurrah.

It's just a virus. It has no political affiliations. It's not a political issue; it's a scientific and medical issue.

You had better believe this is not about science, but about politics.

Some people say so. But the climate keeps getting warmer, and the virus continues in spite of anyone's imaginative narratives.

 

[isaiah4318]

Search Results - PubMed

Behold the basis for your PubMed evidence -> "expert opinion."

Your other ones use "research explanations" which are merely subjective and a dime a dozen. All worthless when it comes to real science which by definition "is observable".

Those aren't clinical trials. Do you know that those are? Do you know what a double blind one is?
How would you like to receive a vaccine based on "expert opinion" instead of clinical trials evidence? I doubt you would. "Not political"? Prove that one! Do you know that their politics are? I doubt it.

it reduces the number of infections, by lowering the amount of the virus that's breathed out into the air.

Just because you say the same thing over and over in multiple posts does not make it true.

Put the politics aside and look at the science.

I've provided the REAL science which is clinical trials and you are ignoring it.

The viruses spiked after mask mandates, you can't get past that one. It's seasonal, it will be back next November and it won't be stopped by anything masks included.

 

[BNR32FAN]

What about the stuff that goes around the mask?

BTW, I've worn a mask less than two hours total since this thing started a year ago. Even on a three hour flight from Denver I was able to very slowly munch peanuts almost the whole flight so I didn't have to wear a mask. The Karens a couple of rows up were furious, but there was nothing they could do.

And I've sneezed and coughed while wearing a mask. Of course, I took it off before I did. Duh.

The mask isn’t designed to protect you it’s designed to protect others from you. I guess if you’ve never coughed or sneezed in a mask then you wouldn’t know that the mask catches the large particles of phlegm and saliva. The portion that comes out the sides of the mask are so minuscule that it dries up in minutes killing the virus. Larger bodies of phlegm and saliva can stay moist for hours allowing the virus to survive 100 times longer.

 

[isaiah4318]

If we had promptly gone to testing, mask mandates, and distancing, we'd have suffered fewer deaths

Not provable - fake science.

But the climate keeps getting warmer and the virus continues in spite of anyone's imaginative narratives./QUOTE]

It was warmer in medieval times. It changes in cycles determined by the sun. 95% of CO2 in our atmosphere is water vapor. That will never be managed by changing the way we do our power.
The cases of the virus have dropped dramatically like the flu does every season. Same number of deaths , etc...

 

[isaiah4318]

isn’t designed to protect you it’s designed to protect others from you

No evidence and you are ignoring the evidence I posted to the contrary. There is also risks stated that say breathing back in what you cough or sneeze out is able to further infect your lungs.
The sneeze was designed to expel pollutants and everyone can do this into their elbow. God knew what he was doing, government mask mandates, not so much.

 

[Direct Driver]

The mask isn’t designed to protect you it’s designed to protect others from you.

I'm fully aware of the reasons they say we must wear a mask. I don't have TV, but I read a LOT. That may explain why I'm not in lockstep with all the Karens out there. I don't get my information from the MSM. Here is something fun with a great story and fascinating video:

Enough Is Enough: Time to Finally Follow the Science on Masks

 

[Direct Driver]

Yes. If we had promptly gone to testing, mask mandates, and distancing, we'd have suffered fewer deaths, and less economic pain. No point in wringing our hands over the botched response; now we have the reality to deal with.

I'm sure you believe that. I don't. I don't believe the death numbers, either. They are pure manufactured nonsense. IMO.

I live my life as though there is no virus. However, I am able to work from home. And that saves me a hellish commute. I save 3 hours a day and $750 a month in commuting costs since last April 1. So this is great for me. But I've seen too many lose their jobs and businesses - permanently - to be happy about any of this. Western civilization has committed suicide. It is like a commercial airliner over the pacific that dumped its fuel at 35,000 feet. We're still flying, but we'll hit the water later this year or next year.

It's gonna be a bumpy ride. You can count on it. And it was not at all necessary. Too many people trusted corrupt politicians and MSM. We're in this for the full ride, like it or not.

 

[Direct Driver]

If you want more evidence that this virus is just politicized nonsense, this can help:

Science Joe and The Neanderthals - Frontpagemag

An excerpt:

In the Dark Ages, rulers said follow the word of God – as interpreted by us – or we’ll burn you at the stake. Today, Democrats say follow the science (our God) – or we’ll burn you at the stake of public opinion.

Last week, Science Joe Biden blasted Texas and Mississippi for lifting face-mask mandates, calling it “Neanderthal thinking.”

The president was quite agitated when he insisted: “The last thing, the last thing we need is Neanderthal thinking that in mean time (the meantime?) everything is fine, take off your mask. Forget it. It’s (sic) still matters… And it’s critical, critical, critical that they follow the science.” Did you get that? It’s really, really, really critical.

The Biden gang is really, really, really concerned. With hospitalizations down, and vaccinations rising, people are engaging in a very un-scientific activity (one not recommended by the CDC and WHO) – thinking.

New York and California have two of the toughest lock-down regimes in the country. Both experienced COVID surges this winter that Florida missed, which would appear to fly in the face of the face-mask culture.
...

 

[probinson]

Thr problem with this assumption is we don’t know how much worse the spread would’ve been if people had not been wearing masks. Your assuming that the masks haven’t slowed the spread with no control subject to base your statement on.

But we do have comparisons.

Different states have taken different mitigation measures with the SAME outcome. It's really eye-opening to look at states that are in the same geographic region and see the results.

Texas and Arizona. Both border towns. Neighboring states. Same climate. Totally different approaches to the virus mitigation. Arizona implemented more strict measures than Texas and actually saw HIGHER rates of infection, hospitalization and death. This begs the question, why? If all of this masking and mitigation "works" and keeps things from being worse, how did Arizona perform so poorly.

Likewise, Florida and California. California locked everything down and had people wearing masks in between bites of food at meals. Yet they have largely the same outcome. Keep in mind that Florida is largely open for business. Disney World has been open since last year while Disney Land in California is STILL not open.

Arkansas and Oklahoma is yet another. Arkansas has had masks since July last year. Oklahoma never has. Results?

Each day that passes provides a new data point that masks, lockdowns, social distancing, curfews, closed indoor/outdoor dining... none of it mattered. As you look at all 50 states, you can see that states with strict mitigation measures are randomly scattered throughout the infection rate table. Some are better, some are worse. But there simply is no correlation, much less any proof of causation, that suggests that masks were the thing that kept infection rates down, and in comparing to states that never implemented those mandates, there is also nothing that would suggest it would have been worse without them.

 

[Direct Driver]

But we do have comparisons.

Different states have taken different mitigation measures with the SAME outcome. It's really eye-opening to look at states that are in the same geographic region and see the results.

Texas and Arizona. Both border towns. Neighboring states. Same climate. Totally different approaches to the virus mitigation. Arizona implemented more strict measures than Texas and actually saw HIGHER rates of infection, hospitalization and death. This begs the question, why? If all of this masking and mitigation "works" and keeps things from being worse, how did Arizona perform so poorly.

Likewise, Florida and California. California locked everything down and had people wearing masks in between bites of food at meals. Yet they have largely the same outcome. Keep in mind that Florida is largely open for business. Disney World has been open since last year while Disney Land in California is STILL not open.

Arkansas and Oklahoma is yet another. Arkansas has had masks since July last year. Oklahoma never has. Results?
View attachment 296039

Each day that passes provides a new data point that masks, lockdowns, social distancing, curfews, closed indoor/outdoor dining... none of it mattered. As you look at all 50 states, you can see that states with strict mitigation measures are randomly scattered throughout the infection rate table. Some are better, some are worse. But there simply is no correlation, much less any proof of causation, that suggests that masks were the thing that kept infection rates down, and in comparing to states that never implemented those mandates, there is also nothing that would suggest it would have been worse without them.

Further, and not to put too fine a point on it, define "case".

 

[probinson]

As you know, research has overwhelmingly shown that masks reduce exposure to the virus.

Nope. As you know, the research is meticulously cherry-picked to support that conclusion. Each time you reiterate this, I will point that out.

And reality beats anyone's reasoning.

Well on this point, we agree.

 

[isaiah4318]

Surgical masks worn by patients reduce aerosols shedding of virus. The abundance of viral copies in fine particle aerosols and evidence for their infectiousness suggests an important role in seasonal influenza transmission. Monitoring exhaled virus aerosols will be important for validation of experimental transmission studies in humans.
Influenza Virus Aerosols in Human Exhaled Breath: Particle Size, Culturability, and Effect of Surgical Masks

Do you even read your own articles? Or do you just read the titles? After spending a lot of time reading that opinionated NON-SCIENCE. I see this at the bottome:
"
facemasks worn by infected persons are potentially an effective means of limiting the spread of influenz
"

"Potentially" LOL. Sorry dude, not science.