OT: COVID-19 Ontario 2nd Wave Thread

[13th Man]

I typed cloth masks bioaerosols in your link. 3rd result had this conclusion:

"Common fabric materials and cloth masks showed a wide variation in penetration values for polydisperse (40–90%) as well as monodisperse aerosol particles in the 20–1000 nm range (40–97%) at 5.5 cm s−1 face velocity. The penetration levels obtained for fabric materials against both polydisperse and monodisperse aerosols were much higher than the value for the control N95 respirator filter media but were in the range found for some surgical masks in previous studies. Penetrations of monodisperse aerosol particles slightly increased at 16.5 cm s−1 face velocity, while polydisperse aerosols showed no significant effect except one fabric mask with an increase. The penetration values obtained for common fabric materials indicate that only marginal respiratory protection can be expected for submicron particles taking into consideration face seal leakage."

So, not dissimilar to surgical masks. No one argues that they do not reduce probability.

But Ian Jones, professor of virology at the University of Reading, said, “If an aerosol droplet hits the weave of the mask fabric rather than the hole it is clearly arrested. And lessening the aerosol dose chips away at the R0 [reproduction number] and helps to slow the epidemic . . . They are not a cure but they address the longer flatter epidemic curve everyone is trying to achieve.”

Glad to see both of you site studies where the facts lead to the conclusion that cloth masks do 'more good than harm' and should be worn in public to lower the probability of infection and therefore help in flattening the curve.

You know, the very opposite of what 13th Man had made claims to.

Negative. My statement still holds merit on cloth masks. What about the part where I highlighted,

"Commenting on these findings, Simon Clarke, associate professor in cellular microbiology at the University of Reading, said, “There is only very limited evidence of the benefits of wearing face masks by the general public, no evidence that wearing them in crowded places helps at all, and no evidence at all yet related to covid-19 . . . The authors also acknowledge that mass face mask wearing by the public would likely cause shortages among people who genuinely need protective equipment—healthcare workers on the front line in our hospitals.”

Note that these limited findings also do not address negative side effects of mask wearing and other contributing factors to increase the risk of infections such as improper usage of cloth masks in terms of handling and as well insufficient washing of the masks after every use. These are some legitimate concerns that Teresa Tam had brought up in the past.

[rrdjutriurt]

The most recent opinion i have heard is that the virus strain has definitely changed from the strain of the March timeframe. It is proving to be more contagious but not nearly as lethal as it was back in March. So that's definitely encouraging.

So far a 100 year old lady has recovered from the virus and Trump just today at the age of 74 has already recovered and has tested negative. He was considered obese and a poor candidate for recovery if he was ever to get it. This should be the last winter that we really have to worry about the virus because of the treatment/recovery drugs that are coming to market as well as the potential vaccines. Life sucks for everyone right now but there is major hope on the way.

[Local_NG_Idiot]

But Ian Jones, professor of virology at the University of Reading, said, “If an aerosol droplet hits the weave of the mask fabric rather than the hole it is clearly arrested. And lessening the aerosol dose chips away at the R0 [reproduction number] and helps to slow the epidemic . . . They are not a cure but they address the longer flatter epidemic curve everyone is trying to achieve.”

Glad to see both of you site studies where the facts lead to the conclusion that cloth masks do 'more good than harm' and should be worn in public to lower the probability of infection and therefore help in flattening the curve.

You know, the very opposite of what 13th Man had made claims to.

Negative. My statement still holds merit on cloth masks. What about the part where I highlighted,

from the paper dated April 7th, and where you once again cherry pick 1 individuals conclusions as well as the paper in question citing this:

The paper, yet to be peer reviewed, included 31 studies, of which 12 were randomised controlled trials.

So you highlight one guy, in one cherry picked paper that makes the admission that it hasn't been peer reviewed and dated from April 7th, is the BEST facts you can find to support your argument. Keep going with this disingenuous opinion.

[13th Man]

Glad to see both of you site studies where the facts lead to the conclusion that cloth masks do 'more good than harm' and should be worn in public to lower the probability of infection and therefore help in flattening the curve.

You know, the very opposite of what 13th Man had made claims to.

Negative. My statement still holds merit on cloth masks. What about the part where I highlighted,

from the paper dated April 7th, and where you once again cherry pick 1 individuals conclusions as well as the paper in question citing this:

The paper, yet to be peer reviewed, included 31 studies, of which 12 were randomised controlled trials.

So you highlight one guy, in one cherry picked paper that makes the admission that it hasn't been peer reviewed and dated from April 7th, is the BEST facts you can find to support your argument. Keep going with this disingenuous opinion.

Cherry picked? It was the first one I chose out of relevance. You can never be satisfied can you? I played by your rules, did my own legwork using your recommended tool and it's still not good enough. Lol. Get off your high horse and provide us with some info of relevance.

[Fairview4Life]

Negative. My statement still holds merit on cloth masks. What about the part where I highlighted,

from the paper dated April 7th, and where you once again cherry pick 1 individuals conclusions as well as the paper in question citing this:

The paper, yet to be peer reviewed, included 31 studies, of which 12 were randomised controlled trials.

So you highlight one guy, in one cherry picked paper that makes the admission that it hasn't been peer reviewed and dated from April 7th, is the BEST facts you can find to support your argument. Keep going with this disingenuous opinion.

Cherry picked? It was the first one I chose out of relevance. You can never be satisfied can you? I played by your rules, did my own legwork and it's still not good enough. Lol. Get off your high horse.

Maybe because it wasn't good enough?

[13th Man]

I'm done with this clown show for today. What a waste of time, will check back another day.

[Local_NG_Idiot]

Negative. My statement still holds merit on cloth masks. What about the part where I highlighted,

from the paper dated April 7th, and where you once again cherry pick 1 individuals conclusions as well as the paper in question citing this:

The paper, yet to be peer reviewed, included 31 studies, of which 12 were randomised controlled trials.

So you highlight one guy, in one cherry picked paper that makes the admission that it hasn't been peer reviewed and dated from April 7th, is the BEST facts you can find to support your argument. Keep going with this disingenuous opinion.

Cherry picked? It was the first one I chose out of relevance. You can never be satisfied can you? I played by your rules, did my own legwork using your recommended tool and it's still not good enough. Lol. Get off your high horse and provide us with some info of relevance.

I clearly stated peer-reviewed, and you picked an article that states it is not peer reviewed. So no, it isn't good enough as a fact check against my claim.

[Local_NG_Idiot]

I'm done with this clown show for today. What a waste of time, will check back another day.

not a clown, check the username.

[13th Man]

I'm done with this clown show for today. What a waste of time, will check back another day.

not a clown, check the username.

Wasn't calling YOU a clown but the process to prove your case. Claims to have multiple peer-reviewed evidence but cannot provide us with one. It's like me saying that I have evidence to a murder and when asked for it, respond with why don't you do your own investigation?

[Local_NG_Idiot]

I'm done with this clown show for today. What a waste of time, will check back another day.

not a clown, check the username.

Wasn't calling YOU a clown but the process to prove your case. Claims to have multiple peer-reviewed evidence but cannot provide us with one.

You're half right this time at least. I did claim there is a lot of peer reviewed data and facts that you are omitting when it comes to concluding 'masks do more harm than good'. That 2nd part though about 'cannot provide' is incorrect.....I stated I would not provide them. I also stated that you could go a fact check my claim, not that you had to.

It's like me saying that I have evidence to a murder and when asked for it, respond with why don't you do your own investigation?

yea, it's nothing like that. what you describe is an actual felony.

[Raps in 4]

The most recent opinion i have heard is that the virus strain has definitely changed from the strain of the March timeframe. It is proving to be more contagious but not nearly as lethal as it was back in March. So that's definitely encouraging.

So far a 100 year old lady has recovered from the virus and Trump just today at the age of 74 has already recovered and has tested negative. He was considered obese and a poor candidate for recovery if he was ever to get it. This should be the last winter that we really have to worry about the virus because of the treatment/recovery drugs that are coming to market as well as the potential vaccines. Life sucks for everyone right now but there is major hope on the way.

The mortality rate is way down, but scientists are saying it hasn't mutated.

Some possible explanations (other than mutation) are:

- Steroids have proven to be an effective treatment method (they're cheap and available)
- We're simply testing way more people during the second wave, so mortality rates are down as a matter of statistics
- More young people have caught it during the second wave (and are being tested) versus the first wave, when retirement homes were hammered
- People are being infected with smaller viral loads because more people are wearing masks/social distancing

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/10/09/covid-mortality-rate-down/

[Van_Trump]

This is my favorite mask research.
Bottom line, masks prevent infection and reduce the severity if you do get infected.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-hamster-masks-coronavirus-scientists.html

And no, the hamsters did not wear masks, as funny as that would be. The cages wore masks.

[NBA Sheady]

I gave you a source, https://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

type in whatever you want to try and find to rebut my statement and read away.

Wow ok. So much for having tons of peer-reviewed evidence. Just refer to Google.

If you aren't aware of how Google Scholar works, and choose to cite a blogger for all your 'facts', my point is made.

Absolutely bodied.

Anyone even casually interested in real science knows what Google Sholar is. This is like when people try to tell me about COVID and the don't know the difference between the disease and the virus. I learned that in the first hour of reading in March.

[lolwut]

Wow ok. So much for having tons of peer-reviewed evidence. Just refer to Google.

If you aren't aware of how Google Scholar works, and choose to cite a blogger for all your 'facts', my point is made.

Absolutely bodied.

Anyone even casually interested in real science knows what Google Sholar is. This is like when people try to tell me about COVID and the don't know the difference between the disease and the virus. I learned that in the first hour of reading in March.

I heard an ad on the radio this morning advertising some adhesive that goes on masks that "kills viruses like COVID-19".

[execoftheyear]

If you aren't aware of how Google Scholar works, and choose to cite a blogger for all your 'facts', my point is made.

Absolutely bodied.

Anyone even casually interested in real science knows what Google Sholar is. This is like when people try to tell me about COVID and the don't know the difference between the disease and the virus. I learned that in the first hour of reading in March.

I heard an ad on the radio this morning advertising some adhesive that goes on masks that "kills viruses like COVID-19".

likely just another company trying to make some money off of the pandemic. I remember an Israeli company had these copper woven masks that deactivate viruses upon coming in contact with the masks' material. This was back in May and still hasn't caught on.

[13th Man]

Wow ok. So much for having tons of peer-reviewed evidence. Just refer to Google.

If you aren't aware of how Google Scholar works, and choose to cite a blogger for all your 'facts', my point is made.

Absolutely bodied.

Anyone even casually interested in real science knows what Google Sholar is. This is like when people try to tell me about COVID and the don't know the difference between the disease and the virus. I learned that in the first hour of reading in March.

Do you want a cookie for that? You can't be serious with this. How about discuss the content of the matter rather than trying to belittle a poster through ridiculous assertions. Local_NG_Idiot seems to be a master user of that tool, yet he could not provide me with one citing of evidence out of the tons that he has.

You guys with your condescending attitudes, grow up. I'm happy to discuss this rationally and am also happy to be proven incorrect if the facts present itself. Speak to me with a little bit of respect and I'll return the favour.

[13th Man]

This article just released today to the public today. I apologize in advance if it hasn't been "peer-reviewed".


https://californiaglobe.com/section-2/new-cdc-study-finds-majority-of-those-infected-with-covid-19-always-wore-masks/

Once again it appears there are conflicting facts, data and plenty of opinions about the efficacy of wearing masks to prevent contracting the Coronavirus.

In addition to causing “maskne” and skin infections on the face and around the mouth, persistent coughing, “mask mouth,” and respiratory illnesses including lung infections, it turns out that most everyone infected with COVID-19 “always” wore masks, according to a newly published study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

The study found 74.2% reported wearing masks “always” while 14.5% worse masks “often.”

It is difficult not to conclude that wearing non-surgical cloth face masks or face coverings does little to prevent contracting the coronavirus.

California Globe reported in April on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s unilateral decision which he announced on MSNBC, to spend $1 billion on surgical face masks, and said the contract had already been “inked.” Newsom made the $1 billion face mask deal with Chinese electric car manufacturer BYD for 150 million N95 masks and surgical masks each month, despite the conflicting science about using face masks for coronavirus prevention. The real reason for the contract is still unknown.

However, the CDC study also said, “CDC and other public health authorities recommend community mitigation strategies to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1,2).” And the CDC still recommends masks, saying “cloth face coverings help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others,” according to a July statement.

From the CDC Study:

Participants were asked about wearing a mask and possible community exposure activities (e.g., gatherings with ≤10 or >10 persons in a home; shopping; dining at a restaurant; going to an office setting, salon, gym, bar/coffee shop, or church/religious gathering; or using public transportation) on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “never” to “more than once per day” or “always.”

For each reported activity, participants were asked to quantify degree of adherence to recommendations such as wearing a face mask of any kind or social distancing among other persons at that location, with response options ranging from “none” to “almost all.”

In the 14 days before illness onset, 71% of case-patients and 74% of controlparticipants reported always using cloth face coverings or other mask types when in public. Close contact with one or more persons with known COVID-19 was reported by 42% of casepatients compared with 14% of control-participants (p<0.01), and most (51%) close contacts were family members.

Interestingly, the CDC found:

Adults with confirmed COVID-19 (case-patients) were approximately twice as likely as were control-participants to have reported dining at a restaurant in the 14 days before becoming ill. In addition to dining at a restaurant, case-patients were more likely to report going to a bar/coffee shop, but only when the analysis was restricted to participants without close contact with persons with known COVID-19 before illness onset. Reports of exposures in restaurants have been linked to air circulation (7). Direction, ventilation, and intensity of airflow might affect virus transmission, even if social distancing measures and mask use are implemented according to current guidance. Masks cannot be effectively worn while eating and drinking, whereas shopping and numerous other indoor activities do not preclude mask use. (Of note, the question assessing dining at a restaurant did not distinguish between indoor and outdoor options. In addition, the question about going to a bar or coffee shop did not distinguish between the venues or service delivery methods, which might represent different exposures.)

3.9% of respondents said they never wore face masks; another 3.9% said they rarely did.

Of the case patients and control participants 61.2% reported at least one of the following underlying chronic medical conditions: cardiac condition, hypertension, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency, psychiatric condition, diabetes, or obesity.

[Kevin Willis]

Watch on YouTube

[13th Man]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/andy-biggs-rips-mask-narrative-after-cdc-report-shows-85-of-symptomatic-people-often-or-always-wore-masks

"He highlighted a portion of the report that showed 108 people who said they “always” wore face masks 14 days before the onset of the coronavirus. The same graph revealed that six people who “never” wore masks showed symptoms of the virus, 11 people who “sometimes” wore masks showed symptoms, and 22 who “often” wore masks showed symptoms."

[execoftheyear]

Watch on YouTube

great video. I still can't believe people are arguing over the effectiveness of masks. It's a simple and effective measure yet people keep digging for info or excuses to avoid wearing one.

Here's another good one:

Watch on YouTube