1/n On 3/8, Dr. Fauci said we don’t need to be walking around in facemasks. Then on April 3rd, he changed course and said we should wear masks to help slow the spread.
2/n In this message on 3/25, Canadian Dr., Gary Kobinger, one of the the members of the WHO STAG-IN task force, we may have our answer.
3/n Dr. Kobinger suggests cloth masks might work b/c mask-wearing countries in East Asia seemed to have lower transmission vs. the rest of the world. He explicitly notes that data shows they DON’T work for flu or rhinoviruses--and DIDN’T work for SARS
4/n The facileness of this thinking is almost breathtaking… They don’t work for flu or SARS-CoV1, but just MIGHT work for SARS-CoV-2, b/c Asian countries are "maskier" ?
Something about this virus, makes it more likely to avoid the laws of physics than other viruses?
5/n
There is no discussion of other, potentially far greater differences, like say, prior exposure and cross-reactivity to other coronaviruses—most of which arise in Asia.
6/n He does at least note an N-95 would reduce it by 95%--only if worn correctly (fit-tested); as you can see from the study linked below, even N-95s are only 12% effective with even a 1% gap. He fails to mention that you can’t fit-test a cloth mask.
7/n
He notes that distancing and physical barriers “seem to work,” assuming droplet transmission. Quite a leap when flu researchers note “we don’t know how flu is transmitted.” Spoiler alert: looks like it’s aerosols <1 micron. CDC still says droplets cdc.gov/flu/about/dise…
8/n The same study found in 2013 that aerosols less than 5 microns had 8.8x more virus than large droplets. It also notes that surgical masks were effective at stopping aerosols larger than 5 microns—but useless below.
9/n Unfortunately, a significant amount of work has been done since that shows that most of the virus-carrying particles are less than 4.7 microns. 87% below 1 micron--well below that 5 micron threshold. & NOT created during aerosol-generating procedures
10/n Subsequent studies beyond that have shown a significant amount of virus-carrying aerosols are in the 0.1-0.5 micron range. Well below the level that is filtered by surgical masks—and actually N-95’s too. liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ja…
12/n Part of the problem, is that a) the CDC continues to insist even flu is spread by large droplets and b) that these aerosols are so small that they cannot be picked up by the instruments used to measure.
13/n We’ll assume that Dr. Kobinger was not aware of all this work when he suggested this. After all, he studies Ebola. And he did at least have the good sense to suggest that we try to get some real research to see if masks REALLY were the reason for the difference in east Asia
14/n But Dr. Fauci didn’t wait for the research to make the announcement—1 week later, he went all-in, telling people to wear masks to stop the spread. pbs.org/newshour/show/…
15/n That kicked off a raft of terrible studies, many of which have now been retracted (like this one) medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
16/n
While some at the CDC started working on those terrible studies, others decided to actually look at the data, and found that, not surprisingly, community masking (or hand washing) has no significant impact on viral transmission. wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26…
17/n Others have found the same thing (even with N-95s--which argues that a lot of those aerosols are indeed in that <0.1 micron range).
18/n And of course we have the grand experiment of the fall, when masking, nationally was at roughly 90%--just like those good Asian nations--and as it increases, cases increased.
19/n We have the matched pairs of California with the tightest restrictions in the country, and Fl, with the 4th loosest. The fall came, deaths in CA floored despite masks, while FL remained much lower.
20/n And yet with all this science telling us what a pointless intervention this was, we continue. Why? Because politicians (and now doctors) have a bias towards action. Instead of "Do no harm.." The hippocratic oath has been jettisoned for “Why not? What’s the harm?"
21/n There is harm. First, there is harm in Dr. Fauci explicitly blaming people who don’t mask.
Second, looking below, while masks DON’T reduce COVID, they DO result in closed schools—b/c they reinforce the myth that we can, and must *STOP* COVID.
1/n
Anybody hear President Biden calling Texas and Mississippi governors Neanderthals for rescinding mask mandates?
Lot of anger and disappointment there. I wonder it there's a better place to direct all that?
So weird how mask mandate states are also the no-school states...
2/n There’s a reason that those graphs look so similar—it’s b/c while there is no correlation between repressive COVID restrictions and COVID deaths, there IS a significant correlation between COVID Restrictions & low-no school, and high unemployment.
3/n Know where else there’s a lot of misplaced outrage? Around COVID deaths. Liberal outrage ought to be focused on the CDC explaining the giant spring spike highlighted in yellow. Instead, it’s focused on Florida’s much smaller green bump.
1/n We are in a 5-alarm social justice emergency. But the culprits are those states whose populations claim to care the most about social justice. BLM support is tightly tied to repressive COVID policies that result in stunningly low access to education and high unemployment.
2/n There is no link whatsoever between these stringency measures and decreased deaths. There IS a very strong link between these policies, high unemployment, and extremely limited access to education.
3/n This is because these policies have nothing to do with science or health, and everything to do with politics. Race, BLM and COVID policies have been wildly politicized, which is why these policies have their tightest correlation with BLM support.
1/n This is true: ONLY thing that defines a state’s response to this is the political leaning of the populace—not the governor. This is why the electoral map correlates nearly perfectly with school closures. We the people are the problem—and the solution.
And yes, masks are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Belief that we can and must control the disease, rather than live with it are symbolized by the near religious belief in the “power” masks. Even the wording is religious.
In her home town (also mine, Newton, MA), she was unable to have any impact on schools (she wrote a letter).
If she can’t open our schools in our wealthy near-Covid-free town, she sure isn’t going to be able to do it elsewhere.
When you select for failure, you get more of it.
When the CDC stops misconstruing everything about COVID to hide its role in using the pandemic as a political tool, kids in blue states will return to schools, and people will return to work. Not before.
COVID has been politicized. Children and families in blue states are paying the price. On average, in red states, 3x as many children have access to 100%, 5-day/week in-person learning as in blue. Nearly 4x as many children in blue states are 100% remote (sources @ end)
2/n This politicization is not saving lives. The average deaths/million in red states is only slightly higher than those in blue states, despite measures that are nearly twice as strict. Follow me for state-by-state data…
3/n 11 states have fewer than 10% of students w/access to 5-day per week in-person learning. All are blue save 1. 10 states have 70% or more children w/access to 100% in-person learning. All are red states.