Meme Man

If this article is factual then based on the CDC findings we should probably consider removing mandates and let people make their own decisions regarding masks without repercussions for choosing to not wear a mask. Link To CDC Report: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf The original number participants at the beginning of the study was 1827 participants. This was narrowed down to 314 which is a good sample, but further studies should be done with a much larger amount of subjects to establish a factual truth as to the use of masks. We already know that masks do not stop the spread of viruses. You can't change the facts that we've known for decades about masks and viral transmission. If mask cause an increased risk then they should be discouraged certainly. We also have known through scientific research that mask worn during surgeries actually increase the spread of bacteria and yet we are still having surgeons wear them. Controversial? Yes, but only because the populace of doctors are so ignorant. Real question: Does there exist a study (not just a feel good comparison by epidemiologists) showing that wearing of a mask is more effective in prevention of viral illness (any viral illness) than placebo? (Because I have not been able to find one over the last 6 months.) Otherwise, time for a NO MASK OCTOBER!!!Cloth mask does not stop aerosolized particles . . . period. (CDC just changed position stating that COVID-19 is now aerosolized.)Mask Wearing DataRitter et al., in 1975, found that “the wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room environmental contamination.”Ha’eri and Wiley, in 1980, applied human albumin microspheres to the interior of surgical masks in 20 operations. At the end of each operation, wound washings were examined under the microscope. “Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all experiments.”Laslett and Sabin, in 1989, found that caps and masks were not necessary during cardiac catheterization. “No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used,” they wrote. Sjøl and Kelbaek came to the same conclusion in 2002.In Tunevall’s 1991 study, a general surgical team wore no masks in half of their surgeries for two years. After 1,537 operations performed with masks, the wound infection rate was 4.7%, while after 1,551 operations performed without masks, the wound infection rate was only 3.5%.A review by Skinner and Sutton in 2001 concluded that “The evidence for discontinuing the use of surgical face masks would appear to be stronger than the evidence available to support their continued use.”Lahme et al., in 2001, wrote that “surgical face masks worn by patients during regional anaesthesia, did not reduce the concentration of airborne bacteria over the operation field in our study. Thus they are dispensable.”Figueiredo et al., in 2001, reported that in five years of doing peritoneal dialysis without masks, rates of peritonitis in their unit were no different than rates in hospitals where masks were worn.Bahli did a systematic literature review in 2009 and found that “no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative wound infection was observed between masks groups and groups operated with no masks.”Surgeons at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, recognizing the lack of evidence supporting the use of masks, ceased requiring them in 2010 for anesthesiologists and other non-scrubbed personnel in the operating room. “Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for surgery is a departure from common practice. But the evidence to support this practice does not exist,” wrote Dr. Eva Sellden.Webster et al., in 2010, reported on obstetric, gynecological, general, orthopaedic, breast and urological surgeries performed on 827 patients. All non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries, and none of the non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries. Surgical site infections occurred in 11.5% of the Mask group, and in only 9.0% of the No Mask group.Lipp and Edwards reviewed the surgical literature in 2014 and found “no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials.” Vincent and Edwards updated this review in 2016 and the conclusion was the same.Carøe, in a 2014 review based on four studies and 6,006 patients, wrote that “none of the four studies found a difference in the number of post-operative infections whether you used a surgical mask or not.”Salassa and Swiontkowski, in 2014, investigated the necessity of scrubs, masks and head coverings in the operating room and concluded that “there is no evidence that these measures reduce the prevalence of surgical site infection.”Da Zhou et al., reviewing the literature in 2015, concluded that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that face-masks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”Mandating masks has not kept death rates down anywhere. The 20 U.S. states that have never ordered people to wear face masks indoors and out have dramatically lower COVID-19 death rates than the 30 states that have mandated masks. Most of the no-mask states have COVID-19 death rates below 20 per 100,000 population, and none have a death rate higher than 55. All 13 states that have death rates higher 55 are states that have required the wearing of masks in all public places. It has not protected them. Dr. Adam Nally - Link to post

CDC study may prove wearing masks increases COVID-19 infections

Be a Journalist – AKA Professional Liar

Biden plagiarizes Satan with “Here’s the Deal”

Support LondonReal.TV

The only Democrat you can believe when he says, “I Don’t Know Anything”

Recent Posts

Popular posts:

Categories