Wearing masks in the grocery store is only a feel good measure.

Estimates vary quite a bit regarding asymptomatic transmission of coronavirus. In researching this information, I came across numbers as low as 5% of cases being asymptomatic to a high of 81% asymptomatic. For the purpose of this post, I am going to use the most common number i find, which is 40%. This is somewhat solidly measured in this study of a town in Italy where basically 85% of the population was quarantined and repeatedly tested. Link: www.nature.com...

"Here we collected information on the demography, clinical presentation, hospitalization, contact network and the presence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in nasopharyngeal swabs for 85.9% and 71.5% of the population of Vo’ at two consecutive time points. From the first survey, which was conducted around the time the town lockdown started, we found a prevalence of infection of 2.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.1–3.3%). From the second survey, which was conducted at the end of the lockdown, we found a prevalence of 1.2% (95% CI: 0.8–1.8%). Notably, 42.5% (95% CI: 31.5–54.6%) of the confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections detected across the two surveys were asymptomatic (that is, did not have symptoms at the time of swab testing and did not develop symptoms afterwards)."

Let's imagine that we are following the mask guidelines. We are using whatever mask we have that may or may not be capable of filtering the virus out. We are not wearing a mask at home, because the government didn't tell us to, even though this letter from the New England Journal of Medicine says:

"We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org) as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions. Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not."

And:

"We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments. A growing body of research shows that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is strongly correlated with the duration and intensity of contact: the risk of transmission among household members can be as high as 40%, whereas the risk of transmission from less intense and less sustained encounters is below 5%.5-7 This finding is also borne out by recent research associating mask wearing with less transmission of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in closed settings.8 We therefore strongly support the calls of public health agencies for all people to wear masks when circumstances compel them to be within 6 ft of others for sustained periods."

The article they are referencing uses this study that looked at 124 families, a total of 335 people of which at least one person in the household contracted coronavirus. They were studying secondary transmission within families in the home: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

The results of which say this:

"The secondary attack rate in families was 23.0% (77/335). Face mask use by the primary case and family contacts before the primary case developed symptoms was 79% effective in reducing transmission (OR=0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.79). Daily use of chlorine or ethanol based disinfectant in households was 77% effective (OR=0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.84). Wearing a mask after illness onset of the primary case was not significantly protective. The risk of household transmission was 18 times higher with frequent daily close contact with the primary case (OR=18.26, 95% CI 3.93 to 84.79), and four times higher if the primary case had diarrhoea (OR=4.10, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.60). Household crowding was not significant."

So the mask only really works if you wear it when you are asymptomatic and presymptomatic, once you exhibit symptoms, the rate of transmission is not slowed very much by the mask.

The sustained interaction within a closed environment that the NEJM mentions sounds a lot like being at home with your family, right? I mean, brief encounters of 5-7 minutes would be like in the grocery store. Sustained encounters would be in your home. So let's say you go to the grocery store and you have your mask on. You stand in line with a person who is also wearing a mask, or maybe not. They are infected and cough. You stand there for while and you end up getting infected too. You come home and take off your mask. Your whole family could now be infected. You may not have any symptoms. Your family might not have any symptoms. If you don't feel sick, you are not very likely to get tested. (At least I don't know anyone who is just getting tested for the heck of it). So, without getting tested you have no idea you are infected and spread it everywhere you go.

I am going to include here thorax.bmj.com... this study of a ship whose passengers all tested negative upon boarding, but later:

"Of the 217 passengers and crew on board, 128 tested positive for COVID-19 on reverse transcription–PCR (59%). Of the COVID-19-positive patients, 19% (24) were symptomatic; 6.2% (8) required medical evacuation; 3.1% (4) were intubated and ventilated; and the mortality was 0.8% (1). The majority of COVID-19-positive patients were asymptomatic (81%, 104 patients)."

So, even after being stuck on a boat together, only 59% of the passengers contracted the virus. 81% of cases were asymptomatic. Does this information suggest that coronavirus is transmitted very easily via asymptomatic carriers? I don't think so.

I suppose this is where contact tracing might come in. For the asymptomatic cases to know they have been exposed and should get tested. However in my neck of the woods, I have not heard anyone talking about contact tracing or QR codes and they don't ask me for any information any time I go anywhere so I don't think contact tracing is that reliable.

My point is, unless people have been wearing masks inside their homes this entire time, which is a closed environment with close contact with others, how do they know they haven't picked up the virus asymptomatically when they were out somewhere and spread it to their whole family already? Or will in the future? Or catch it and be pre-symptomatic and still spread it to their family, because they don't know they are sick in the pre-symptomatic but contagious stage of the virus. I have a migraine and I don't even know if this made sense.

Every mask that’s not rated in every single possible setting and circumstances on any individual of any age creed or colour regardless of health conditions perceived or otherwise is nothing more then a exercise in feeling good.

If they insisted masks be held to a standard literally any standard at all I couldn’t make this argument. But the only real requirement is your face must be covered regardless of material or application or duration of use. Most people just pull out a day old mask out of their back pocket....like common.

No standards means no standing.

a reply to: Chalcedony

a reply to: Athetos

This whole thing would be a lot more believable if they had better standards for the masks. As it is, I believe the case count should be much much higher but most are asymptomatic and never get tested because they don't really feel sick.

a reply to: Chalcedony

I hope your migraine doesn't last too awfully long.

During this whole pandemic my daughter got tested once (neg) because of possible exposure at work. My grand daughter got tested once(neg) because of being around her mom. And the guy I rent a room from got tested once(neg) because of feeling sick and had actually been in close proximity to someone at work who tested positive. I've never been tested.

We don't live in a high infection rate area.

My three-ply cloth mask isn't rated to prevent virus from getting me. But if I do get it, at least I will spread less. (40-60%). At least that's something. But yeah I like a feel-good now and then, mostly at the grocery store.

There was research in Wuhan that used 10 million participants, the largest research ever done.

It identified that asymptomatic transmission was not possible.

Here's a British Medical Journal link to the study BMJ


Face masks are a fallacy.

They encourage touching the face, false sense of security. Research that shows face masks work never study masks on their own. Every study that endorses masks disregards the behaviour that accompanies excessive mask wearing: social distancing, cowardice, semi lockdowns.

But on ATS we don't discuss things logically anymore. It's either COVID IS FAKE or YOU ARE A SHILL.


I don't know what happened when AS was 'sold' (ahem) but it seems that at the same time as it was sold, people became stupid and the decent members left.

Watching this video is likely more effective than using a mask...

They want to take your right to shop or go to a grocery store away if you don’t take the vaccination.

a reply to: Athetos

I had no idea that mask efficacy depended on race...

It doesn’t and you missed the dry humour of which my post was steeped in.

Strange how race was the only thing you jumped on and not creed. Says more about you then me.
a reply to: DragonsDemesne

a reply to: Athetos

Sorry; I'm on the side of common sense on this issue, and I did not recognize your sarcasm. There's been so much misinformation and stupidity on this forum lately.

Ok just so we are clear any mask that isn’t rated is useless. See I am like to tell the truth inside the joke. The flowery speech is the joke the masks are useless is the truth. It’s the truth telling comedian routine, it’s easy these days.

Curious what to you is the dangerous misinformation.
a reply to: DragonsDemesne

FLASHBACK

Wearing a Mask? It May Come From China’s Controversial Labor Program

Our visual investigation reveals that several Chinese companies are using Uighur labor from a contentious government program to produce P.P.E. during the pandemic. We track some of that equipment to the U.S. and around the world....