Why Masks Suck Mega Dump

*Data from a University of Illinois at Chicago review

N95 – A properly fitted N95 will block 95% of tiny air particles down to 0.3 μm from reaching the wearer’s face. https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained.

But even these have problems: many have exhalation valve for easier breathing and less moisture inside the mask.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

Surgical masks are designed to protect patients from a surgeon’s respiratory droplets, aren’t effective at blocking particles smaller than 100 μm.

Note: A COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) particle is 0.125 micrometers (μm); influenza virus size is 0.08 – 0.12 μm; a human hair is about 150 μm.

*1 nm = 0.001 micron; 1000 nm = 1 micron; Micrometer (μm) is the preferred name for micron (an older term)

1 meter is = 1,000,000,000 nm or 1,000,000 microns

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VLXWeZBll7YJ:https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/957730O/respirators-and-surgical-masks-contrast-technical-bulletin.pdf+&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Filter efficiency was measured across a wide range of small particle sizes (0.02 to 1 µm) at 33 and 99 L/min.

N95 respirators had efficiencies greater than 95% (as expected).

T-shirts had 10% efficiency,

Scarves 10% to 20%,

Cloth masks 10% to 30%,

Sweatshirts 20% to 40%, and

Towels 40%.

All of the cloth masks and materials had near zero efficiency at 0.3 µm, a particle size that easily penetrates into the lungs.

Another study evaluated 44 masks, respirators, and other materials with similar methods and small aerosols (0.08 and 0.22 µm).

N95 FFR filter efficiency was greater than 95%.

Medical masks – 55% efficiency

General masks – 38% and

Handkerchiefs – 2% (one layer) to 13% (four layers) efficiency.

Conclusion: Wearing masks will not reduce SARS-CoV-2.

N95 masks protect health care workers, but are not recommended for source control transmission.

Surgical masks are better than cloth but not very efficient at preventing emissions from infected patients.

Cloth masks will be ineffective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, whether worn as source control or as personal protective equipment (PPE).

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VLXWeZBll7YJ:https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/957730O/respirators-and-surgical-masks-contrast-technical-bulletin.pdf+&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

“Masks may confuse that message and give people a false sense of security. If masks had been the solution in Asia, shouldn’t they have stopped the pandemic before it spread elsewhere?”

*The first randomized controlled trial of cloth masks.

A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers

Penetration of cloth masks by particles was 97% and medical masks 44%, 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%), 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%).

Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.

The virus may survive on the surface of the face- masks

Self-contamination through repeated use and improper doffing is possible. A contaminated cloth mask may transfer pathogen from the mask to the bare hands of the wearer.

Cloth masks should not be recommended for health care workers, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

Effectiveness of Surgical and Cotton Masks in Blocking SARS–CoV-2: A Controlled Comparison in 4 Patients

*A study of 4 patients in South Korea

Known patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 wore masks and coughed into a Petrie dish. “Both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface.”

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

Overall, data were collected from 714 men and women. About half the sample were women and all adult ages were represented. Only 90 participants (12.6%, 95% CI 10.3%-15.3%) passed the visual mask fit test. About three-quarters performed strap placement incorrectly, 61% left a “visible gap between the mask and skin,” and about 60% didn’t tighten the nose-clip.

*A 2011 randomized Australian clinical trial of standard medical/surgical masks

Study Casts Doubt on N95 Masks for the Public

— Singapore experiment suggests few would wear them correctly, even with instructions

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/86601

Medical masks offered no protection at all from influenza.

A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fitested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

>>9809658

The World Health Organization (WHO):

Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19

“Advice to decision makers on the use of masks for healthy people in community settings

As described above, the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks.”

“Medical masks should be reserved for health care workers. The use of medical masks in the community may create a false sense of security, with neglect of other essential measures, such as hand hygiene practices and physical distancing, and may lead to touching the face under the masks and under the eyes, result in unnecessary costs, and take masks away from those in health care who need them most, especially when masks are in short supply.”

“Masks are effective only when used in combination with frequent hand-cleaning with alcohol-based hand rub or soap and water.”

WHO acknowledges that most people do not use masks properly.

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331693/WHO-2019-nCov-IPC_Masks-2020.3-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y&fbclid=IwAR3KiSo51gvxINfMhviRf37Q7OE1e3cMfHmZXlDlZEwRmgPWDxfP57IsGug

Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the Center for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases:

“We don’t routinely recommend the use of face masks by the public to prevent respiratory illness,” said on January 31. “And we certainly are not recommending that at this time for this new virus.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/t0131-2019-novel-coronavirus.html

Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era

In March 5, 2019 regarding the flu: “Masks are not usually recommended in non-healthcare settings; however, this guidance provides other strategies for limiting the spread of influenza viruses in the community:

cover their nose and mouth when coughing or sneezing, use tissues to contain respiratory secretions and, after use, to dispose of them in the nearest waste receptacle, and perform hand hygiene (e.g., handwashing with non-antimicrobial soap and water, and alcohol-based hand rub if soap and water are not available) after having contact with respiratory secretions and contaminated objects/materials.

From the New England Journal of Medicine

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

The Possible Role of Vitamin D in Suppressing Cytokine Storm and Associated Mortality in COVID-19 Patients

If wearing a mask makes people go out and get Vitamin D – go for it. In the 1918 flu pandemic people who went outside did better. Early reports are showing people with COVID-19 with low Vitamin D do worse than those with normal levels. Perhaps that is why shut-ins do so poorly.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20058578v4

>>9809662

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

“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.”

Final Thoughts

Surgical masks – loose fitting. They are designed to protect the patient from the doctors’ respiratory droplets. The wearer is not protected from others airborne particles

People do not wear masks properly. Most people have the mask under the nose. The wearer does not have glasses on and the eyes are a portal of entry.

The designer masks and scarves offer minimal protection – they give a false sense of security to both the wearer and those around the wearer.

**Not to mention they add a perverse lightheartedness to the situation.

If you are walking alone, no mask – avoid folks – that is common sense.

https://aapsonline.org/mask-facts/

Meta analysis: "None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and prevention of influenza transmission."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/

Flu virus is about 1000 times smaller than the width of a human hair. This study looks at the pore sizes of 20 different cotton masks versus N-95 surgical masks.

The researchers found that all of the cotton masks had pore sizes that were bigger than the width of a human hair – and got even bigger after washing. This means that the width of the holes in every cotton mask are 1000 times bigger than the size of the corona virus. Like trying to catch a fish with a net where the holes were 1000 times bigger than the fish you were trying to catch. surgical masks might stop bacteria – which are ten times bigger than viruses.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31289698

A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers

Conclusions This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577?fbclid=IwAR10n4XuIqgKFZQDEItYH73EhB0qLO78nid8PmRXeKHJ-1U2p9il5feY830

Another study using live viruses transmitted by a simulated sneeze found that surgical masks (not cotton masks), cut down on the virus transmission rate in a human volunteer by a factor of 2.

https://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr619.pdf

Both surgical and cotton masks were ineffective in blocking the corona virus: “Both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface.”

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

Here is what the CDC used to say about the general public wearing masks: “The following interim CDC guidance was developed in response to questions about the role of masks for controlling seasonal influenza virus transmission. Masks are not usually recommended in non-healthcare settings.”

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/infectioncontrol/maskguidance.htm

The Physiological Impact of N95 Masks on Medical Staff

Detailed Description:

Wearing N95 masks results in hypooxygenemia and hypercapnia which reduce working efficiency and the ability to make correct decision.

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00173017

>>9809664

Here is another study where pregnant women wearing N95 masks were studied:

“Breathing through N95 masks have been shown to impede gaseous exchange and impose an additional workload on the metabolic system of pregnant healthcare workers, and this needs to be taken into consideration in guidelines for respirator use. The benefits of using N95 mask to prevent serious emerging infectious diseases should be weighed against potential respiratory consequences associated with extended N95 respirator usage.”

https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13756-015-0086-z

Headaches Associated With Personal Protective Equipment – A Cross‐Sectional Study Among Frontline Healthcare Workers During COVID‐19

“Most healthcare workers develop de novo PPE‐associated headaches or exacerbation of their pre‐existing headache disorders.”

https://headachejournal.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/head.13811

Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery

“Although decrease in both mental - physical performance and accuracy may sometimes be overcome by the motivation of the surgeon, increased fatigue is common in lengthy operations. The increased endogenous heat production of the surgeon, as well as many aspects of the opera- ting room situation -even the close environment beneath the surgical mask- may also negatively affect the working condition of the surgeon. Surgical masks may impose some measurable airway resistance, but it seems doubtful if this significantly increases the process of breathing. “

http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/neuro/v19n2/3.pdf

An empirical and theoretical investigation into the psychological effects of wearing a mask

“A review of the literature shows that the wearing of a mask has been hypothesised to bring about four main psychological effects: disinhibition, transformation, facilitation of the expression of aspects of the wearer’s Self, and various psycho-somatic changes. Several different explanations have been proposed as to why each of these effects come about. Using theoretical and empirical research, the thesis explores in detail the hypothesis that a mask can disinhibit its wearer, and that this disinhibition comes about because the mask-wearer feels less identifiable. The findings show that a mask can significantly reduces its wearer’s feelings of identifiability, and that it can also significantly reduce its wearer’s public self-awareness as a consequence of changes in attentional focus. However, the empirical evidence suggests that the mask’s disinhibiting effect is limited to situations in which an individual wants to behave in a particular way, but inhibits that behaviour out of a concern with ‘mask-able’ facets of their public self. Concomitantly, the findings suggest that, if an individual wants to behave in a way for which they require ‘mask-able’ facets of the public self, then the wearing of a mask may be experienced as inhibiting. This thesis also examines the hypothesis that a mask can transform its wearer, and that this occurs through the self-attribution process outlined by Kellerman and Laird (1982). The thesis provides strong empirical support for both these hypotheses, showing that the wearing of a mask can make individuals feel less like their usual self and more like the character represented in the mask. However, the empirical evidence suggests that this latter effect only occurs under conditions in which an individual is specifically focused on their masked appearance. A final chapter discusses the theoretical and applied implications of these findings, with specific reference to the use of masks in therapeutic practice.”

https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/43402/

>>9809676

Effects of wearing N95 and surgical facemasks on heart rate, thermal stress and subjective sensations

“The results from the experiment demonstrate that heart rate, microclimate (temperature, humidity) and subjective ratings were significantly influenced by the wearing of different kinds of facemasks.

High breathing resistance made it difficult for the subject to breathe and take in sufficient oxygen. Shortage of oxygen stimulates the sympathetic nervous system and increases heart rate It was probable that the subjects felt unfit, fatigued and overall discomfort due to this reason.

As the purpose of wearing the facemasks is to protect the wearers by filtering out viruses and bacteria, it is obviously questionable whether the surgical masks, which induce less heat stress and discomfort, can provide enough protection for healthcare workers.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00420-004-0584-4

Influence of anxiety level on work performance with and without a respirator mask

“While experimental variability precluded many of the results from achieving statistical significance, performance times with the mask averaged less than without the mask. Anxious subjects experience more discomfort, perform for shorter times, and accomplish less total work than their lower anxiety counterparts, even when rate of work can be adjusted.”

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15428119591016485

Here's how #masks INCREASE risk of viral infections:

Wear mask →

Less oxygen available to lungs →

Hypoxia through body →

The body makes hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) →

HIF-1 lowers CD-4 T-cell function →

But CD-4 T-cells are needed to fight viral infections.

Cutting Edge: Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1 Negatively Regulates Th1 Function

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26179900/

Hypoxia Enhances Immunosuppression by Inhibiting CD4+ Effector T Cell Function and Promoting Treg Activity

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28278498/

Hypoxia-driven Immunosuppression Contributes to the Pre-Metastatic Niche

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23482904/

Surgical face masks and downward dispersal of bacteria

A large, controlled, prospective trial reported that the use of face masks by the surgical team standing over the sterile field did not affect wound infection rates [5].

A nonrandomised study suggested that wound infection rates may actually increase when face masks are worn [6], supporting the work by Schweizer, which suggested that face masks may increase dermabrasion and bacterial shedding [4].

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1365-2044.1998.435-az0528.x

Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID-19: A rapid systematic review

"Based on the RCTs we would conclude that wearing facemasks can be very slightly protective against primary infection from casual community contact, and modestly protective against household infections when both infected and uninfected members wear facemasks. However, the RCTs often suffered from poor compliance and controls using facemasks. Across observational studies the evidence in favour of wearing facemasks was stronger. We expect RCTs to under-estimate the protective effect and observational studies to exaggerate it. The evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks as a protective measure against COVID-19. However, there is enough evidence to support the use of facemasks for short periods of time by particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1?ijkey=b1746b4011ec7b388c144883aef3b76232c649a2&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

>>9809677

Cloth masks versus medical masks

for COVID-19 protection

"Most people in all seriously affected areas are reusing their disposable masks. The physical

properties of a cloth mask, reuse, the frequency and effectiveness of cleaning, and increased moisture

retention, may potentially increase the infection risk, since, as it indicated by Osterholm et al. [7]

the virus may survive on the surface of the facemasks. "

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340579116_Cloth_masks_versus_medical_masks_for_COVID-19_protection

Evaluation of Filtration Performance Efficiency

of Commercial Cloth Masks

This study was designed to evaluate the filtration efficiencies and pressure drops of five commercial

cloth masks (4 plate type, 1 cup type) in comparison to the performance of a class 1 disposable respirator

(reference respirator).

The filtration efficiencies of the five cloth masks were below 30% and did not improve greatly

by increasing the number of layers. After a single washing, their performances decreased. Considering the above and other issues identified with cloth masks, such as poor fit and stretched fibers through use, people should not expect protection against particulate matters from the cloth masks on the market.

https://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO201521839156288.pdf