And yes, it has to be properly fitting of course that goes without saying, but the study found that surgical masks seem to compare well with n95…

A recent meta-analysis shows that, compared with surgical mask use, use of N95 respirators is associated with a >50% reduced risk of overall clinical respiratory illness but has no apparent superiority in preventing viral infection,11 which is supported by a more recent large-scale RCT in an outpatient setting.

Are you completely 100% protected? Not even close… but there is a reduction in your odds of catching it in a passing exposure.

There is a reason masks are categorized as Personal Protective Equipment.

I would in no way feel ‘safe’ going to a large gathering with just a mask, but if you must run into the store for supplies it improves your odds somewhat… the better the mask the better your odds…

“Before going into the epidemiological evidence on the effectiveness of medical facemasks in preventing respiratory infection, it is important to clarify the difference between surgical masks and respirators. Respirators, formally known as ‘disposable filtering half-facepiece respirators’, are designed to reduce the user’s exposure to airborne particles (e.g. fine dust generated from industrial processes such as grinding of metals, or biological aerosols generated from sneezing) by forming a tight-fit seal around the user’s face, which requires a careful fit test before use and is difficult to achieve in the presence of facial hair”

Furthermore, the article also stated that their main use would be social signalling of sorts:

“…wearing facemasks is a highly visible and iconic behaviour that might increase the public’s risk awareness and encourage them to seek other relevant health information and improve their personal hygiene behaviours, many of which have been proven to be effective in infection control (e.g. handwashing, social distancing)”

There also seems to be conflict in the sources; some are used to state that masks in general are not as effective as believed (“Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery”, others are used to state that masks are highly effective (“Facemasks for the prevention of infection in healthcare and community settings”), and some simply state no discernably significant difference between maks and respirators (“N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel”) – again, this is all for the same article. Combined with the fact that several of the papers cited were either summaries of other papers (potentially ones cited for this article), or relied on self-reporting from subjects on adherence to method and results; meaning we have no assurance that subjects are properly following procedures, or that statistically significant results can be linked to one practice (face-covering), as opposed to social distancing, hand-washing, or any combination of behaviours). Let’s not even get into the fact that peer-replicable, controlled environment, laboratory testing isn’t something that could easily, or ethically be done.

Properly worn, fully sealed respirators do have a significant chance of inhibiting infection – I will agree to this; however, the eyes are still vulnerable, and the article offers no citation concerning the statement that the evidence “defies the claim” to such.

Ultimately, from what I know of medical practice (which is limited to First Aid/CPR/AED training, and dialogue with medical staff), I’m not convinced that wearing a respiratory mask – medical or cloth – does not protect you from aerosol infection; these items are meant to inhibit you from infecting others.

This is the professional opinion of the CDC, the WHO, and various medical branches of universities around the country, and the world. Stay at home when you can, wear a mask if you have to, observe proper hygiene and maintain 6 ft minimum distance at all times! This is possible for people!

There has been largely consistent randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence in health care workers that wearing surgical masks and N95 respirators can reduce the risks of respiratory illnesses [including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)] by 40–60%, after accounting for key confounders such as other protective equipment or hygiene measures.8,11 However, uncertainty remains as to whether surgical masks are inferior to N95 respirators in preventing infection. A recent meta-analysis shows that, compared with surgical mask use, use of N95 respirators is associated with a >50% reduced risk of overall clinical respiratory illness but has no apparent superiority in preventing viral infection,11 which is supported by a more recent large-scale RCT in an outpatient setting.8 Despite the potential superiority of N95 respirators over surgical masks, the evidence in health care workers defies a common claim that surgical masks are ineffective for prevention because some coronaviruses (e.g. SARS-CoV-2) may be airborne in specific scenarios (e.g. during aerosol generating procedures) and/or can infect people through the mucous membranes of the eyes.

Keep in mind,the covid virus is 100nm (wavelength of visible light is 400-750nm… If we were actually trying to filter out particles of that size it would be very challenging… but the virus is not terribly likely to be released from a carrier as a single free-floating particle. They will be released mixed into far larger droplets.

About a year before covid I had to really research filtration of small particles because I was concerned one of my projects was generating nano-particles of metal. HEPA filters are certified to “remove at least 99.97% of dust, pollen, mold, bacteria, and any airborne particles with a size of 300nm or 0.3µm.”

You might assume that this means that they would not filter particles the size of the covid virus (~100nm), but that is not the case… they can be very effective, they just are not certified for particles less than 300nm. Smaller particles are very effectively removed by electrostatic attraction to the small fibers of the filter material.

But again, the particles you need to block are not so much individual virus particles, its larger droplets carrying 1000′s or millions of viruses.

Social distancing is important too, but sometimes you have to be around others. Masks protect the wearer, and more importantly they greatly reduce the chances that an infected person can infect others.

Wearing a mask reduces exposure.

Its like wearing a seat belt, or quitting smoking. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

But deliberately not wearing a mask just to make a political point is irresponsible and vicious. Those people are low-life scum and deserve to die gasping for breath.

While you can and should wear a mask when in a public setting, social distancing is far more important. Again, noone should be leaving home unless they absolutely have to.

Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover-guidance.html
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/06/21/880832213/yes-wearing-masks-helps-heres-why

The majority of those infected (even if they don’t end up in the hospital) have heart damage- we of course don’t know if that damage is permanent.

There are also widely reported cognitive deficits after recovery from infection- that scares me more than the heart damage.

Co-workers have lost family to this, so far I have been lucky enough not to- but if we go the Herd Immunity route of the stupid, then I almost certainly will.

This criminal stupidity will probably impact most people- if it isn’t personally an outrage to you it should be.