My missive to Trish Greenhalgh - she who is pushing, yet again, the wearing of masks in the UK
Seems she's learned nothing in nearly 2 years
Ms. Greenhalgh,
I have been reading with interest your pronouncements in the MSM of your belief that more face mask wearing should be more forcibly pushed onto the general public.
I have also read these 2 publications you were involved with from 2020:
https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1435
I see that you seemed to cherry pick data and studies that suited your preconceived conclusions and you seem to ignore these quotes, amongst others, in your own article:
"A pooled meta-analysis found no significant reduction in influenza transmission"
"None showed a significant reduction in laboratory confirmed influenza in the face mask arm. The authors concluded: “randomized controlled trials of [face masks] did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
So how you reached the conclusion you did I cannot understand.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt as both were published prior to this, the latest Randomised Control Trial was conducted in Denmark (April to June 2020) and which has been the biggest RCT on the wearing of masks to date in the world and is the most recent and which has finally been published after being refused by at least 3 recognised medical journals
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
Study conclusion: masks do NOT have any effect on the transmission rate of the covid-19 virus:
The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers
You nor your “Google” group do not seem to have found these studies during your data search:
Neil Orr’s study, published in 1981 in the Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Their conclusion: “It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all” and that wearing a mask during surgery “is a standard procedure that could be abandoned.””
Here is the original study published on the NIH website so it’s official:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf
Ritter et al., in 1975, found that “the wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room environmental contamination.”
Ha’eri and Wiley, in 1980, applied human albumin microspheres to the interior of surgical masks in 20 operations. At the end of each operation, wound washings were examined under the microscope. “Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all experiments.”
Laslett and Sabin, in 1989, found that caps and masks were not necessary during cardiac catheterization. “No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used,” they wrote. Sjøl and Kelbaek came to the same conclusion in 2002.
In Tunevall’s 1991 study, a general surgical team wore no masks in half of their surgeries for two years. After 1,537 operations performed with masks, the wound infection rate was 4.7%, while after 1,551 operations performed without masks, the wound infection rate was only 3.5%.
A review by Skinner and Sutton in 2001 concluded that “The evidence for discontinuing the use of surgical face masks would appear to be stronger than the evidence available to support their continued use.”
Lahme et al., in 2001, wrote that “surgical face masks worn by patients during regional anaesthesia, did not reduce the concentration of airborne bacteria over the operation field in our study. Thus they are dispensable.”
Figueiredo et al., in 2001, reported that in five years of doing peritoneal dialysis without masks, rates of peritonitis in their unit were no different than rates in hospitals where masks were worn.
Bahli did a systematic literature review in 2009 and found that “no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative wound infection was observed between masks groups and groups operated with no masks.”
Surgeons at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, recognizing the lack of evidence supporting the use of masks, ceased requiring them in 2010 for anesthesiologists and other non-scrubbed personnel in the operating room. “Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for surgery is a departure from common practice. But the evidence to support this practice does not exist,” wrote Dr. Eva Sellden.
Webster et al., in 2010, reported on obstetric, gynecological, general, orthopaedic, breast and urological surgeries performed on 827 patients. All non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries, and none of the non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries. Surgical site infections occurred in 11.5% of the Mask group, and in only 9.0% of the No Mask group.
Lipp and Edwards reviewed the surgical literature in 2014 and found “no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials.” Vincent and Edwards updated this review in 2016 and the conclusion was the same.
Carøe, in a 2014 review based on four studies and 6,006 patients, wrote that “none of the four studies found a difference in the number of post-operative infections whether you used a surgical mask or not.”
Salassa and Swiontkowski, in 2014, investigated the necessity of scrubs, masks and head coverings in the operating room and concluded that “there is no evidence that these measures reduce the prevalence of surgical site infection.”
Da Zhou et al., reviewing the literature in 2015, concluded that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”
Or how about these:
1 T Jefferson, M Jones, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 7.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2
2 J Xiao, E Shiu, et al. Nonpharmaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in non-healthcare settings – personal protective and environmental measures. Centers for Disease Control. 26(5); 2020 May.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
3 J Brainard, N Jones, et al. Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID19: A rapid systematic review. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 1.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1.full.pdf
4 L Radonovich M Simberkoff, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinic trial. JAMA. 2019 Sep 3. 322(9): 824-833.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214
5 J Smith, C MacDougall. CMAJ. 2016 May 17. 188(8); 567-574.
https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567
6 F bin-Reza, V Lopez, et al. The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. 2012 Jul; 6(4): 257-267.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/
7 J Jacobs, S Ohde, et al. Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Infect Control. 2009 Jun; 37(5): 417-419. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/
8 M Viola, B Peterson, et al. Face coverings, aerosol dispersion and mitigation of virus transmission risk.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.10720, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2005/2005.10720.pdf
9 S Grinshpun, H Haruta, et al. Performance of an N95 filtering facepiece particular respirator and a surgical mask during human breathing: two pathways for particle penetration. J Occup Env Hygiene. 2009; 6(10):593-603.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15459620903120086
10 H Jung, J Kim, et al. Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 2013 Jun. 14:991-1002. https://aaqr.org/articles/aaqr-13-06-oa-0201.pdf
11 C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long
12 N95 masks explained. https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained
13 V Offeddu, C Yung, et al. Effectiveness of masks and respirators against infections in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Inf Dis. 65(11), 2017 Dec 1; 1934-1942.
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/
14 C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.
15 M Walker. Study casts doubt on N95 masks for the public. MedPage Today. 2020 May 20.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/86601
16 C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.
17 N Shimasaki, A Okaue, et al. Comparison of the filter efficiency of medical nonwoven fabrics against three different microbe aerosols. Biocontrol Sci. 2018; 23(2). 61-69.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/23/2/23_61/_pdf/-char/en
18 T Tunevall. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: A controlled study. World J Surg. 1991 May; 15: 383-387.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01658736
19 N Orr. Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre? Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 1981: 63: 390-392. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf
20 N Mitchell, S Hunt. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms – a costly and unnecessary ritual? J Hosp Infection. 18(3); 1991 Jul 1. 239-242.
https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/0195-6701(91)90148-2/pdf
21 C DaZhou, P Sivathondan, et al. Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery. JR Soc Med. 2015 Jun; 108(6): 223-228.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/
22 L Brosseau, M Sietsema. Commentary: Masks for all for Covid-19 not based on sound data. U Minn Ctr Inf Dis Res Pol. 2020 Apr 1.
23 N Leung, D Chu, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks Nature Research. 2020 Mar 7. 26,676-680 (2020).
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-16836/v1
24 S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744
25 S Bae, M Kim, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: A controlled comparison in 4 patients. Ann Int Med. 2020 Apr 6.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342
26 S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744
27 C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long
28 W Kellogg. An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks. Am J Pub Health. 1920. 34-42.
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.10.1.34
29 M Klompas, C Morris, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the Covid-19 era. N Eng J Med. 2020; 382 e63. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372
30 E Person, C Lemercier et al. Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance. Rev Mal Respir. 2018 Mar; 35(3):264-268.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29395560/
31 B Chandrasekaran, S Fernandes. Exercise with facemask; are we handling a devil’s sword – a physiological hypothesis. Med Hypothese. 2020 Jun 22. 144:110002.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32590322/
32 P Shuang Ye Tong, A Sugam Kale, et al. Respiratory consequences of N95-type mask usage in pregnant healthcare workers – A controlled clinical study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015 Nov 16; 4:48.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26579222/
33 T Kao, K Huang, et al. The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease. J Formos Med Assoc. 2004 Aug; 103(8):624-628.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15340662/
34 F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/
36 F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/
37 A Chughtai, S Stelzer-Braid, et al. Contamination by respiratory viruses on our surface of medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3; 19(1): 491.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31159777/
38 L Zhiqing, C Yongyun, et al. J Orthop Translat. 2018 Jun 27; 14:57-62.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30035033/
39 C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4) https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
40 A Beder, U Buyukkocak, et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery. Neurocirugia. 2008; 19: 121-126.
http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/neuro/v19n2/3.pdf
41 D Lukashev, B Klebanov, et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha and its activation-inducible short isoform negatively regulate functions of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol. 2006 Oct 15; 177(8) 4962-4965.
https://www.jimmunol.org/content/177/8/4962
42 A Sant, A McMichael. Revealing the role of CD4+ T-cells in viral immunity. J Exper Med. 2012 Jun 30; 209(8):1391-1395.
Or the BMA supplied this answer when I questioned them on their stance on the wearing of face coverings/masks:
"We appreciate that this is an area in which there is little high-quality empirical evidence. There is, for example, a lack of randomised control trials showing that mask wearing is effective (either indoors or outdoors)."
So if the BMA does not have any scientific evidence to back-up their stance but is relying on “because we said so” who does?
And what did the Government supply?
This, a report issued by the Royal Society’s DELVE Group to justify face coverings in more and more situations.
Problem though is the report was written by a data analytical group so no medical people involved, just data analysis.
In this report
https://rs-delve.github.io
and https://rs-delve.github.io/addenda/2020/07/07/masks-update.html it states:
A series of controlled experiments in a hamster SARS-CoV2 transmission model and “the index animal was “masked”’
the majority of SARS-CoV2 infected individuals remain asymptomatic throughout infection.
There are no human controlled trials on the efficacy of universal mask use in stemming SARS-CoV2 transmission.
However, the conclusions of this study are not supported by the presented evidence, as summarized by a number of scientists requesting a retraction by the authors.
The masked hamster study is real but does not even come close to simulating real-life situations.
Unfortunately they admit this about the report: "has not been subject to formal peer-review.” and "DELVE and the Royal Society accept no legal liability for decisions made based on this evidence."
Then recently there was a study done using mannequins I recall reading that somehow forgot that humans have to breath in and out continuously, they do not just breath in once and have done with it.
They also link to studies which has a stated conclusion does not match the main body of the literature nor the results obtained and is completely at odds with the rest of the report/study.
Your stance is based soley on what “may/might/possibly” work in a laboratory setting with professionals but as a real-world solution to be used by the public?
My honest answer? Not a hope.
You also conveniently forget the physical and psychological problems caused by prolonged wearing of masks and face coverings don’t you?
Surely you know what these problems are? No?
The most common medical problems are:
bad breath
mask mouth (like meth mouth)
bacteria build up in mouth
rotting teeth
acne and infected spots
impetigo
pleurisy
skin problems
bacterial pneumonia - that can lead to death
viral pneumonia - that can lead to death
fungal pneumonia - that can lead to death
continuous cough
dry mouth/throat due to lack of spit and mucus - remember we are designed to breathe in through nose, out through mouth to avoid breathing in any viruses, bacteria, dust etc and to filter it with nose hairs before it enters the body and so on
weakened immune system leading to more illnesses and sickness
colds and flu
viral illnesses
hypoxia - low oxygen levels (if you see someone who is a bit grey this is a typical symptom, not lips turning blue) - very dangerous to unborn babies so pregnant women should not wear them.
hypoxemia - due to breathing in an increased CO2
continuous and/or increasingly worse headaches
increased heart rate
increased blood pressure
difficulty breathing leading to panic attack
viral lung infections
serious depression
panic attacks
feeling of being hemmed in or smothered
loss of sense of self
shame
compliance as masks wearing is a feature of many rituals by various groups and religions
A large group of prominent psychologists has written to world Governments raising the psychological issues and been ignored.
In addition to that is the health and safety considerations in the use of face coverings as PPE and these legal obligations are very in-depth as to what the “employer” or other person who is mandating the use of them has to comply with in regards of training, FIT tests, medical checks, evidence based risk assessments and so on.
It is just not as simple as telling staff “wear a mask because I said so”.
Or as an academic you don’t worry about how to implement policies properly?
Then there is this classic example of academic based, navel gazing, blue sky thinking that cannot make sense of the real world.
Recently the government was frightening the population with a blitz of terrifying propaganda on how “dangerous” shops and supermarkets are.
Why are they so “dangerous”?
Easy! Surely even ministers, their researchers or SAGE members can figure it out? Masks are involved with the problem.
1 - Because it’s the place most people are going to regularly as everywhere else is closed down. It’s about the only place they can “catch” something.
2 - Because this is where 99.9% of the population are wearing face coverings/masks the whole time they are at the supermarket.
And the most important and relevant:
3 - Because people are wearing virus/bacteria laden dirty face coverings/masks, cough and sneeze into them, wear them for too long and not as per the manufacturer’s instructions, do not wash or sanitise cloth ones regularly, play with them every few seconds then touch the food/tins sometimes picking it up then putting it back without washing their hands with soap and hot water correctly between touching the mask and touching the goods and subsequently spreading all those "deadly germs" around.
If Government nor their advisors can figure this out then it’s time for new advisors.
So far, not one single member of SAGE not any other self-proclaimed Government “advisor” has replied with any rebuttal of my version of the facts on this subject nor on PCR tests or social distancing nor asymptomatic transmission nor have they answered any of my questions on the same subjects.
Will you be any different?
Do you want a copy of the correspondence and questions so you can attempt to answer them?
Yours sincerely
Excellent post. I really like to see what the data actually says rather rely on fake state propaganda. Thank you!