Stonesy wrote:
If everyone wears the mask for 10 the second walk to the table, the hostess is protected by 100% of the guests she seats.
If no one wears a mask, the number drops to 0%.
Sure, the waiters get exposed, but only to 10-20% of the total guests depending on how many servers there are.
It’s a numbers game for risk exposure.
It’s not about your protection but protection from you, the guest.
Except that the masks provide no protection.
" Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.
" We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility. "
https://wwwnc.cdc.Gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_articleNew Study Shows Mask Mandates Had Zero Effect in Florida or Nationwide, But the Lie Continues
https://townhall.c=Com/columnists/scottmorefield/2020/12/21/new-study-shows-mask-mandates-had-zero-effect-in-florida-or-nationwide-but-the-l-n2581879As Dr. Andrew Bostom points out in an interview with noted liberal feminist Naomi Wolf, multiple randomized controlled tests—the “gold standard” of scientific evidence—performed prior to the pandemic found that masks have no impact on the transmission of respiratory viruses. The only RCT conducted since the pandemic began, the so-called “Danmask study,” reached the same conclusion.
https://www.washingtontimes.Com/news/2020/nov/19/mask-effectiveness-study-denmark-counter-cdc-recom/A WHO report issued this past December, while (oddly) advising people to continue wearing masks in public, contained this little nugget near the end: “A large randomized community-based trial in which 4862 healthy participants were divided into a group wearing medical/surgical masks and a control group found no difference in infection with SARS-CoV-2. A recent systematic review found nine trials (of which eight were cluster-randomized controlled trials in which clusters of people, versus individuals, were randomized) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness. Two trials were with healthcare workers and seven in the community. The review concluded that wearing a mask may make little or no difference to the prevention of influenza-like illness.”
https://www.who.Int/publications/i/item/advice-on-the-use-of-masks-in-the-community-during-home-care-and-in-healthcare-settings-in-the-context-of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak?fbclid=IwAR3KqNhMe1kZfztDyu4BbjD9fCMQhCnkvjRZG-FDUrdoN8nKeAALowfTCIs“While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures.”
https://www.fda.Gov/medical-devices/personal-protective-equipment-infection-control/n95-respirators-surgical-masks-and-face-masksBelow are 7 studies that found masks are ineffective at stopping COVID-19 like viruses.
American Greatness:
Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417–419.
N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) “N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824–833.
“Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. … Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
Long, Y. et al. (2020) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1–9.
“A total of six RCTs involving 9,171 participants were included. There were no statistically significant differences in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza, laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza-like illness using N95 respirators and surgical masks. Meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of N95 respirators against laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456.
None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.
Bin-Reza et al. (2012) “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267.
“There were 17 eligible studies. … None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”
Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016
“We identified six clinical 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, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.”
Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) “Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, pages 1934–1942,
“Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significant.”