And thats so important to you, that you posted it twice in five minutes...
🙄
Anyway: AFAIK the reasoning is (at least here in Germany, where the situation is serious, but much less than in the US, and where people probably don‘t behave much better than in the US except for a general rule to wear masks in defined situations like when shopping in the supermarket) that
the mask might not protect you fully against infection, but it protects other from you, spreading it, when you are unknowingly carrying it. Even then it is not perfect, but it slows particles, aerosols and such down. And that then seems to have a measurable effect:
Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks
There are many more of such studies and similar results, but of course, one has to find them instead of ignore them.
I see it this way: when you really do lectures about correctness of medical studies, then you‘ve heard about risk analysis ( sorry if I use the wrong term, as I‘m not a native speaker). And since neither studies are 100% conclusive if even normal masks help lowering the risk of infecting others in specific situations or not, then just because of the risk to infect people with a currently very dangerous virus would be a good reason to wear one and educate people how to do it correctly instead of outright rejecting the idea completely.
It‘s not a big thing, IMHO, to do that for your fellow citizens.
(This post is way too long about a topic where people usually stop talking with reason after two or three replies to each other, and it contains no pictures, so I apologize for that. Maybe later, I have plenty of related pictures.)
“ There are many more of such studies and similar results, but of course, one has to find them instead of ignore them.”
That’s true, there are many more such studies with similar results. But, the referenced study does not demonstrate anything which counters anything which I posted above. In fact, there are no actual studies which do so. I have no disagreement with the findings of this study, but they are not relevant to the discussion of whether generalized mask mandates have provide the results that the lay public thinks they do.
This study was about the transmission of liquid droplets greater than 100 microns in size i.e. tangible matter expelled when sneezing or coughing, and aerosols containing liquid particles around the 5 micron level, sizes which are several orders of magnitude larger than viruses. This study is not measuring viruses which are released in normal breathing. The study found that masks reduced the transmission of viruses contained in aerosols and larger globules as in coughing from being found in 30% of the samples from sick patients not wearing a mask, to 10% of the samples of those wearing masks, a small but statistically significant finding. But, to understand exactly how relevant this is to the discussion of incidental contact in a public setting, you have to understand how these results were obtained and contrast that with situations outside a laboratory, and then apply that to real world applications.
They used a G-II Bioaerosol collector to come up with these results, and it was worn for 30 minutes while patients breathed, sneezed, and coughed into it. After 30 minutes, there were detectable viral loads in the collected samples of more or less 30% of those not wearing masks, and 10% of those wearing masks.
This is what a G-II Bioaerosol collector looks like:
It took 30 minutes of collecting everything from basically one inch away from the subject’s mouth to generate the results in this study. The results are valid, but need to be put into context and applied to everyday situations of human contact. There is nothing in here which contradicts anything I mentioned earlier, it only amplifies it. 30 minutes of close sustained contact with infected people. Hospitals, nursing homes, private homes with sick family members. That’s when masks matter, not walking past people on the street while being a few feet away.
The effect of masks in this study referenced here could be duplicated by holding your hand over your mouth when you cough, or sneezing into your elbow. It was dealing with the spread of tangible droplets and aerosols, not normal breathing.
If we are talking about the proven efficacy of the mandatory wearing of cloth masks in stopping the spread of this disease, person to person, out in the air, normal distances, which is what I was specifically talking about, there simply are not any studies demonstrating that, and there won’t be, because that is not how this virus spreads.
People want to post other studies which they think, like this one, backs up the idea that has caused normal people to drive around in their cars with masks on, that’s okay, because I can do this all day. But, I am not going to because it’s become a religious cult which is marked by the same kind of cognitive dissonance as every cult. All I would ask is for the few people who are open to reason and the actual science, to ask themselves a few questions now and then and at least consider the possible answers to those questions, even if you don’t have a background in medical research. Questions like: there were a quarter of a million people packed into Sturgis SD a few months ago, in close quarters not wearing masks, because bikers, and the huge, eagerly awaited superspreader event of the massive anticipated increase in cases and deaths from that bit of unmasked carelessness never happened, contrary to initial reports. Why not? I live in a small town with a small population in a valley enclosed on all sides by mountains, populated by people who are not naturally “followers”. We has over 4 million people flood in here in the last 3 months from urban areas with large incidences of Covid-19 cases, who took a very lackadaisical approach to mask wearing while they were here. We expected the result to be a hellscape of disease and death brought in here by obvious carriers. The actual result was nothing, tiny uptake in cases, but no deaths or significant illnesses. Why not? That’s a huge sample size, an in vitro experiment, that’s not “luck”.
Most people won’t question what they are told if it seems to be coming from people they trust, if they hear it often enough, even if they don’t understand the science, I get that. It’s hard to push back against that no matter the evidence.