BREAKING: Danish Mask Study Just Released- Masks Don't Work

The protocol had a significant number of measures for adverse events: bacteria, psychological, full healthcare, sick leave, infection in the household, other hospital diagnostics, etc.

NONE are included in the study. What happened there?

Anyone with a brain knows having a mask on your face and increasing your CO2 levels is damaging to one's health.

agip wrote:

the reason to wear masks is to keep you from passing your covid to someone else.

doesn't everyone know this?

Sure...if there's a virus that's really a threat. This is a cold virus that's been hyped up and overblown to no end. There are so many people who test positive that are asymptomatic - it's not even funny anymore. And the average age of a supposedly Covid death is 79 with 90% having 2.6 comorbidities (and old sickly people die of cold viruses all the time).

Yeah...that's really something to panic about and lockdown nations. Of course, the MSM like CNN is having a field day with this implementing "operation fearmongering." CNN's ratings pre-COVID were dead in the water to point where they were looking at cut backs. Now they're the most watched cable news outlet as people love to get their daily dose of fear & paranoia. ?

ryan evans wrote:

Allen53 wrote:

If they stopped PCR testing healthy people the "pandemic" would be over tomorrow..

How would they explain away all the refrigerated semi trucks they're bringing in to El Paso and stacking with bodies, though?

Similar videos out of Moscow.

Those are just normal every day non-excessive deaths, right?

IMO, Faked. Go there and try to see the bodies for yourself and they won't let you.

When the pharma cartel & medical industrial complex is hyping up and over blowing a cold virus to no end to achieve high compliance of their vaccines, they fabricate things like this to create more fear & hysteria (see...it's working on you).

What's going on here is take over of world governments by the pharma cartel & medical industrial complex with an objective of vaccinating every person on the planet with the Covid-19 vaccine.

Since surveys have shown that compliance for the vaccine is low in this country, the fearmongering will onky get worst and to a breaking point where most people will be begging for the vaccine. ?

Let's think this one through wrote:

ryan evans wrote:

How would they explain away all the refrigerated semi trucks they're bringing in to El Paso and stacking with bodies, though?

Similar videos out of Moscow.

Those are just normal every day non-excessive deaths, right?

IMO, Faked. Go there and try to see the bodies for yourself and they won't let you.

You're a lunatic and should be jailed.

Allen53 wrote:

Anyone with a brain knows having a mask on your face and increasing your CO2 levels is damaging to one's health.

Unless, of course, you're a doctor.

"In this small crossover study, wearing a 3-layer nonmedical face mask was not associated with a decline in oxygen saturation in older participants."

Of course, these are big-pharma shills with their "elite medical doctor degrees."

Its unconvincing even if statistically valid. Things can be statistically valid but of no practical informative value and I think that's where we are here.

They need to do the study during a time when there is more than a trivial chance of being infected. And then the other issues such as mask (non)use at home (with possibly asymptomatics). How would or did they control for exposure during non masked hours at home to asymptomatics...people who never developed disease yet were infectious? I have a college age kid. He knows multiple people who tested positive but had no symptoms and would not have been tested except it was mandatory.

If the study was otherwise airtight, maybe it would be more persuasive but as is, I found it of little utility.

Having said that, I completely appreciate that mask effectiveness is a very difficult thing to study.

agip wrote:

the reason to wear masks is to keep you from passing your covid to someone else.

doesn't everyone know this?

Nope.

Latest word is it does that plus protects the wearer.

Of course what we are told does change every few days or so

campaigner wrote:

Who the hell is scouring the internet for “breaking” mask studies to post on a running website?

People who want to form opinions based on science and data?

The Unkle wrote:

campaigner wrote:

Who the hell is scouring the internet for “breaking” mask studies to post on a running website?

People who want to form opinions based on science and data?

Great. Read here and share your thoughts.

Despite the fact the CDC was forced by facts to admit that aggregate result of COVID so far is similar to that of “severe” seasonal flu, fear mongering today is aimed solely to continue terror in order to suppress any inquiry into genocidal policies and to deny any culpability regarding their rule changing, action or inaction and decision making under baselessly imposed emergency rule which foremost included complete immunity for potential future crimes they may have committed in relation to dealing with pandemic.

They will continue to defend their deadly legacy even by ignoring hard scientific data that continuously destroys their COVID narrative and by changing narratives, goalposts definitions of returning to normality or rather new normal, from following science to denying science for political expediencies.

The mandatory masks decision serves both those goals: proliferation of fear of one another and hence enhancing anxiety, and most importantly to cover up criminal disproportionality of COVID response and “mitigation” and severity of the virus infection threat to population.

https://rationalground.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/9-4-Kansas-Cases-1024x733.png

Allen53 wrote:

BREAKING: The long-awaited Danish RCT on mask effectiveness was published today. First ever randomized controlled trial for masks in the general population. (6 K participants, some 5 K completed the study).

RESULT: "The difference observed was not statistically significant."

“No statistically significant difference” between mask wearers and non-mask wearers. In line with the science pre-2020. Strange how that works.

IN PLAIN LANGUAGE, AGAIN: Masks don't work.

This is the >15th RCT = same result

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

So, you are one of them idiots. Good to know.

So the several paragraphs I wrote in my last post where I defined and discussed the "power" of studies was to address your initial critique that the case positivity rate was too low to show an effect. As I said, the authors ANTICIPATED a low positivity rate when planning the study. With a low positivity rate, it IS much harder to demonstrate an effect (or lack thereof). You can do it, but you need A LOT MORE participants. They planned for this, and recruited enough participants so that the study would have statistical power.

Put another way, it would be much easier, as you said, to demonstrate an effect (or lack thereof) if the positivity rate had been higher. But a low positivity rate doesn't make it impossible - it just means you just have to recruit a lot of participants to demonstrate an effect.

As to your other point, they don't need to control for unmasked time at home. That's the whole point of a randomized controlled trial. It takes place in the real world. In the real world, people are not wearing masks in their own houses.

You cant just say the study is "unconvincing" or "of little utility" because your gut tells you you don't like it. Your statistical critique is invalid. The study has limitations (the biggest being that it doesnt say anything about masks preventing the spread to others), but it IS solid.

From the study

The most important limitation is that the findings are inconclusive...

and

It is important to emphasize that this trial did not address the effects of masks as source control [protecting others from the wearer] or as protection in settings where social distancing and other public health measures are not in effect.

Great, you are entitled to your opinion.. on behalf of my colleague who was banned, probably for daring to insult the august expert *unkle", I suggest you consider that he is not the only one who finds this study to be of little value.

https://twitter.com/LawrenceGostin/status/1329810537526550531?s=19

Disko Eric wrote:

I can’t tell If Allen is a troll or mentally handicapped.

Mentally handicapped troll?

Allen53 wrote:

https://rationalground.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/9-26-Spain_France-Masks-1024x612.png

would you care to extrapolate that graph with next 6 weeks of figures too please?

I have a feeling you'll be surprised...

Well, the authors of the study were the ones that said that it doesn’t show face masks have no significant effect. So...