Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.
Trump's policy was as good as any President could have done and definitely better than any Democrats record. His China ban alone is proof that he was faster to move to almost any world leader. No other nations except those with direct borders with China cut off travel from China before Trump did. Notably, Europe has had far worse COVID than the U.S.
Masks, even Fauci denounced masks for several months.
Trump had Bloom Energy and HPQ making ventilators, and he had 3M making masks. He closed down the greatest economy ever in the world to fight the virus, and today the WHO just said they oppose lock-downs. Trump has been right all along - sorry haters.
But look at what is and isnāt said in your examples, AND what was said in mine: masks (even cloth) are better than NO protection.
From the studies you cited:
There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission.
This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection.
No problem... This is a twelve second search. There are dozens more going back over 20 years. Masks, in general, provide NO defense against common viruses. They just don't. Cloth masks are useless. Beyond useless, they are actually counter productive outside. That is simple science.
Abstract Background: Health care workers outside surgical suites in Asia use surgical-type face masks commonly. Prevention of upper respiratory infection is one reason given, although evidence of effectiveness is lacking.
Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. A larger study is needed to definitively establish noninferiority of no mask use.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 January 2010
Summary
Influenza viruses circulate around the world every year. From time to time new strains emerge and cause global pandemics. Many national and international health agencies recommended the use of face masks during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic. We reviewed the English-language literature on this subject to inform public health preparedness. There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission. There are fewer data to support the use of masks or respirators to prevent becoming infected. Further studies in controlled settings and studies of natural infections in healthcare and community settings are required to better define the effectiveness of face masks and respirators in preventing influenza virus transmission.
Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review - Volume 138 Issue 4
www.cambridge.org
Results: We identified 6 clinical studies (3 RCTs, 1 cohort study and 2 caseācontrol studies) and 23 surrogate exposure studies. In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection (RCTs: odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64ā1.24; cohort study: OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.03ā6.41; caseācontrol studies: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.25ā3.36); (b) influenza-like illness (RCTs: OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19ā1.41); or (c) reported workplace absenteeism (RCT: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.57ā1.50). In the surrogate exposure studies, N95 respirators were associated with less filter penetration, less face-seal leakage and less total inward leakage under laboratory experimental conditions, compared with surgical masks.
Background: Conflicting recommendations exist related to which facial protection should be used by health care workers to prevent transmission of acute respiratory infections, including pandemic influenza. We performed a systematic review of both clinical and surrogate exposure data comparing...
www.cmaj.ca
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis quantified the protective effect of facemasks and respirators against respiratory infections among healthcare workers. Relevant articles were retrieved from Pubmed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled estimates. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicated a protective effect of masks and respirators against clinical respiratory illness (CRI) (risk ratio [RR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.46ā0.77) and influenza-like illness (ILI) (RR = 0.34; 95% CI:0.14ā0.82). Compared to masks, N95 respirators conferred superior protection against CRI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.36ā0.62) and laboratory-confirmed bacterial (RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.34ā0.62), but not viral infections or ILI. Meta-analysis of observational studies provided evidence of a protective effect of masks (OR = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03ā0.62) and respirators (OR = 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06ā0.26) against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection. However, the existing evidence is sparse and findings are inconsistent within and across studies. Multicentre RCTs with standardized protocols conducted outside epidemic periods would help to clarify the circumstances under which the use of masks or respirators is most warranted.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found evidence for a protective effect of facemasks and respirators against clinical respiratory infection
She likes fake news.
Dr. Fauci in a long interview said that Trump NEVER impeded or got in the way of the science. So what Coyote quoted is a LIE. Typical Democrat.
A new report from The New York Times indicates that experts have āgenuine confidenceā that the coronavirus pandemic will end āfar soonerā than originally expected and that President Donald Trumpās Operation Warp Speed ā the administrationās efforts to facilitate and accelerate the development...
www.dailywire.com
A new report from The New York Times indicates that experts have āgenuine confidenceā that the coronavirus pandemic will end āfar soonerā than originally expected and that President Donald Trumpās Operation Warp Speed ā the administrationās efforts to facilitate and accelerate the development, manufacturing, and distribution of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics ā has been āworking with remarkable efficiency.ā
Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.
Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.
Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)
Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19. What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results. What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.
Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.
The ones who got it at work........were in the offices......wearing masks when near anyone...........and it didn't matter........those in the field not jack squat.
But look at what is and isnāt said in your examples, AND what was said in mine: masks (even cloth) are better than NO protection.
From the studies you cited:
There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission.
This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection.
No problem... This is a twelve second search. There are dozens more going back over 20 years. Masks, in general, provide NO defense against common viruses. They just don't. Cloth masks are useless. Beyond useless, they are actually counter productive outside. That is simple science.
Abstract Background: Health care workers outside surgical suites in Asia use surgical-type face masks commonly. Prevention of upper respiratory infection is one reason given, although evidence of effectiveness is lacking.
Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. A larger study is needed to definitively establish noninferiority of no mask use.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 January 2010
Summary
Influenza viruses circulate around the world every year. From time to time new strains emerge and cause global pandemics. Many national and international health agencies recommended the use of face masks during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic. We reviewed the English-language literature on this subject to inform public health preparedness. There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission. There are fewer data to support the use of masks or respirators to prevent becoming infected. Further studies in controlled settings and studies of natural infections in healthcare and community settings are required to better define the effectiveness of face masks and respirators in preventing influenza virus transmission.
Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: a systematic review - Volume 138 Issue 4
www.cambridge.org
Results: We identified 6 clinical studies (3 RCTs, 1 cohort study and 2 caseācontrol studies) and 23 surrogate exposure studies. In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection (RCTs: odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64ā1.24; cohort study: OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.03ā6.41; caseācontrol studies: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.25ā3.36); (b) influenza-like illness (RCTs: OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19ā1.41); or (c) reported workplace absenteeism (RCT: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.57ā1.50). In the surrogate exposure studies, N95 respirators were associated with less filter penetration, less face-seal leakage and less total inward leakage under laboratory experimental conditions, compared with surgical masks.
Background: Conflicting recommendations exist related to which facial protection should be used by health care workers to prevent transmission of acute respiratory infections, including pandemic influenza. We performed a systematic review of both clinical and surrogate exposure data comparing...
www.cmaj.ca
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis quantified the protective effect of facemasks and respirators against respiratory infections among healthcare workers. Relevant articles were retrieved from Pubmed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled estimates. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicated a protective effect of masks and respirators against clinical respiratory illness (CRI) (risk ratio [RR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.46ā0.77) and influenza-like illness (ILI) (RR = 0.34; 95% CI:0.14ā0.82). Compared to masks, N95 respirators conferred superior protection against CRI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.36ā0.62) and laboratory-confirmed bacterial (RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.34ā0.62), but not viral infections or ILI. Meta-analysis of observational studies provided evidence of a protective effect of masks (OR = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03ā0.62) and respirators (OR = 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06ā0.26) against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection. However, the existing evidence is sparse and findings are inconsistent within and across studies. Multicentre RCTs with standardized protocols conducted outside epidemic periods would help to clarify the circumstances under which the use of masks or respirators is most warranted.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found evidence for a protective effect of facemasks and respirators against clinical respiratory infection
There is no dang proof cloth masks do squat.............New York did worse than anywhere on PLANET EARTH.........They went postal on lockdowns and mask wearing..............didn't stop JACK.
The microns are too dang small and the virus goes though cloth...............garbage.
Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.
The ones who got it at work........were in the offices......wearing masks when near anyone...........and it didn't matter........those in the field not jack squat.
Itās likely that face masks, by blocking even some of the coronavirus-carrying droplets you inhale, can reduce your risk of falling seriously ill from COVID-19, according to Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at UCSF.
The ones who got it at work........were in the offices......wearing masks when near anyone...........and it didn't matter........those in the field not jack squat.
Itās likely that face masks, by blocking even some of the coronavirus-carrying droplets you inhale, can reduce your risk of falling seriously ill from COVID-19, according to Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at UCSF.
The ones who got it at work........were in the offices......wearing masks when near anyone...........and it didn't matter........those in the field not jack squat.
Itās likely that face masks, by blocking even some of the coronavirus-carrying droplets you inhale, can reduce your risk of falling seriously ill from COVID-19, according to Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at UCSF.
That's because the people of Sweden are following the guidelines and recommendations without mandates. Trump supporters are too stupid to do that. Wear the ******* mask.
Swedes are largely following the government agenciesā advice and recommendations. This has been shown through surveys and data concerning movement patterns.
(AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill) The purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse...
Understanding adaptive immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is important for vaccine development, interpreting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pathogenesis, andā¦
www.sciencedirect.com
I'm gonna keep posting that study.......over and over again............Because Corona has been here for a very very long time...............and this is exactly why younger people walk right through it........and older people do not.........
Your T cells degrade with age...............Most got this and never knew they had it.
Cloth masks are BS...........shutting down the country was BS..........the death rate below 50 is MINIMIAL.........and your side has been cooking the dang books to take advantage of the Gov't tit in the Cares Act.
That's because the people of Sweden are following the guidelines and recommendations without mandates. Trump supporters are too stupid to do that. Wear the ******* mask.
That's because the people of Sweden are following the guidelines and recommendations without mandates. Trump supporters are too stupid to do that. Wear the ******* mask.
Hmmmm. I don't recall seeing much social distancing at those protests and riots. I seen Democrats shoulder to shoulder destroying their cities, attacking police, and even federal buildings. I don't recall seeing any hand sanitizer stations.
So the people of Sweden took it upon themselves to practice safe measures, but were never mandated. Isn't that what we are doing in the US these past several months outside of Democrat strongholds?
That's because the people of Sweden are following the guidelines and recommendations without mandates. Trump supporters are too stupid to do that. Wear the ******* mask.
Today, and despite the presidentās own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.
The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call ānon-pharmaceutical interventionsā has made a huge difference in lives saved.
No he hasn't.
He's tossed it out as a CDC recommendation only and that he wouldn't be wearing one. Setting a fine example and setting the country on fire with COVID.
President Trump has informally backed the idea of Americans covering their faces as his task force debates whether to officially recommend they wear masks.