This week, @TorontoStar published 2 articles re. whether the public should upgrade their masks for the Delta wave.
That's good, except that they chose to interview ID experts steeped in #DropletDogma, who thoroughly muddied the waters on this critical, life-saving topic.
🧵1/
First is this story, which asks: Is it time to upgrade your mask? The obvious answer is YES!! But instead of giving this unequivocal advice, the article muddies the issue, providing reckless quotes from the Ministry of Health and biased IPAC officials.
Canadian PPE manufacturers answered the call and stood up lines in record time. But now they can't move their product, because PH/IPAC are stuck on #DropletDogma. HCWs aren't being given N95s for COVID patients. So then what are we saving them for??
Next up, @AlonVaisman IPAC at @UHN, weighs in with some classic #DropletDogma. First, he states that N95 masks "require a proper fitting", thus they shouldn't be recommended for the public. @brosseau_lisa has debunked this talking point.
Let's also clarify that it's not a "fitting", they aren't molding the respirator to your face. They're just checking that a particular style of respirator seals to your face shape. The new soft-fold respirators are comfortable and fit most faces.
While a poorly fitting respirator might fail with 5% leakage during head movements, that's obviously superior than a gapping surgical mask, which will fail with 20% leakage during quiet breathing.
Dr. Vaisman also says KN95s don't require a fit test "because they provide a better seal". That is so incredibly wrong. @TorontoStar should have called an Occ Hygienist to fact check this. KN95s typically have earloops instead of headstraps, hence they will have a worse seal.
8/
He then loses all credibility by stating that a loose surgical mask is "adequate" and encourages the public NOT to upgrade their mask to an N95 or KN95. This is dangerous nonsense given that SARS2 primarily transmits via inhaled Aerosols and Delta is even more transmissible.
9/
The icing on the cake, is this statement suggesting that people generally don't need to wear masks indoors, and that taking off your mask at a restaurant is "totally fine". Aerosols do not care about IPAC's 2m rule. Maybe he should read Li et al 2021.
Finally, the article should've disclosed that the MOH and IPAC have a huge COI re. this question. They have been actively obstructing HCWs from accessing N95s. If it turns out (as physics would suggest) that they were wrong, they are LIABLE.
So if that wasn't bad enough, @TorontoStar had to go and release ANOTHER article, just to make sure the water was sufficiently muddied for parents. This one interviewed some different ID Docs, who are equally steeped in #DropletDogma.
First, we have Dr. Banerji suggesting kids not wear respirators, because "we need to keep them for the hospitals". Again.. we have a GLUT OF RESPIRATORS in 🇨🇦.
HCWs CURRENTLY AREN'T ALLOWED TO WEAR THEM.
And obviously a respirator that would fit A KID wouldn't fit an adult! 13/
The second statement is even worse. Dr. Banerji says that a non-fit-tested N95 is *useless*. The cognitive dissonance in this is astounding. She recognizes how critical FIT is, to the point that she says an imperfect N95 is *useless*, but then says wear a cloth mask. WHAT? 14/
If the above anti-masker statement re. unfitted N95s being *useless* wasn't bad enough, @TorontoStar included another from Dr. Wong, who implied it was dangerous for ANYONE to be wearing a Respirator all day, without breaks. This is "harms of acne" style hot garbage.
15/
THERE ARE NO HARMS ASSOCIATED WITH WEARING A RESPIRATOR!
THEY ARE ENGINEERED TO BE BREATHABLE.
I know many people, including my husband, who wear them ALL DAY LONG.
Next time, interview an Occ Hygienist, or an ACTUAL PPE EXPERT.
16/
There are many child-size KN95 and KF94 respirators on the market, which have a great filter AND FIT, and which are engineered to be comfortable and BREATHABLE.
Here's one example, which I've heard great things about:
While you can try to MacGyver a cloth mask with a filter, which may or may not be breathable, and may or may not fit well - a more reliable solution is to buy Respirators that are already fit for purpose.
You can re-use them, just let them sit for a day or 2 between uses.
19/
If re-using Respirators is still out of your budget, a surgical mask + mask fitter brace is another great option. See this excellent thread 👇
For the past 20 months, experts in Aerosol transmission of respiratory viruses have been conducting studies that prove #COVIDisAirborne. These experts have called for Airborne mitigations (ventilation, filtration and respirators), but we have not heeded their calls. Why?
🧵1/13
The ID/PH Evidence-Based Medicine gatekeepers, driven by biased #DropletDogma groupthink, and sunk cost fallacy, smugly dismissed these studies. They threw rocks at the conclusions, and perpetually raised the bar of evidence to accept and mitigate Airborne Transmission.
2/13
The criticisms from these self-anointed gatekeepers were ripe with logical fallacies, and they never bothered to offer a plausible alternate explanation for the undeniable indoor superspreader events. Just baseless declarations that COVID is NOT Airborne.
The @Telegraph released an article claiming "we're still not completely sure how coronavirus spreads or how to stop it", muddying the waters re. Airborne Transmission.
If I were a hostile foreign state, with a goal of prolonging the Pandemic in the West, I would write this.
🧵1/
I'm not surprised that the usual WHO IPC Consultant suspects, continued to preach the biased tenets of #DropletDogma via their interviews in this article.
What shocked me is the lack of scientific fact-checking from the so-called "Science Editor" @sarahknapton.
2/
Two egregious things stick out, which amount to journalistic malpractice.
1) Citing the interviewees biased, failed review as evidence that Airborne Transmission isn't occurring
2) Referencing year-old, obsolete comments from Dr. Klompas, without mentioning his recent work
Any mask will provide some source control, but given Delta's formidable transmissibility, it's time for #bettermasks to maximize protection for ourselves and others.
☑️FILTER
🟠GOOD: A 3 ply, tightly-woven, cloth mask with a polypropylene inner layer
🟡BETTER: ASTM rated surgical masks, Level 2 or 3
🟢BEST: KN95, KF94, N95, Elastomeric Respirators
But since COVID spreads in aerosols.. we also need to #mindthegaps with a good FIT...
2/
☑️FIT
🟠GOOD: Thin cloth mask over a surgical mask, or use ear-saver/hair clip.
🟡BETTER: KN95/KF94 respirator with user seal-check, or mask brace on surgical mask.
🟢BEST: N95/N99/Elastomeric Respirator with user seal-check. If high-risk worker: Fit-Tested Respirator
There has been a multi-day debate occurring amongst @AntibioticDoc and many engineers and Aerosol scientists, regarding whether there is sufficient evidence to use HEPA filters to mitigate against Airborne Transmission of SARS2.
For those following this HEPA filter thread – this is a really important acknowledgement. It’s clear from the thread, and this particular tweet, that many Infectious Disease experts still doubt that aerosol transmission is an important/mitigable transmission route for SARS2🧵 1/
While they acknowledge aerosol transmission can occur, they believe it is a rare event occurring in special circumstances, and is therefor not worth the $ to mitigate.
Eg. re HEPAs: "We need to resource by best impact", "Changes need rigorous justification and business case".
2/
See my pinned tweet for a thread summarizing the overwhelming evidence that Aerosol Transmission is an important and mitigable route. At the end, I provided a reference list and posed a question to the ID holdouts - no responses yet. 3/
During Friday's debate with @kprather88 and @DFisman, Dr. Conly raised a fairly common counter-point for why he thinks COVID is NOT Airborne: the relatively low Secondary Attack Rate (SAR) and Reproduction Rate (R0).
Let's unpack this flawed argument in a 🧵
1/
Dr. Conly states the SAR is 3 to 10%, with a household mean of 18%.
He then correctly points out that there is significant heterogeneity within the data, which means some people transmit to no contacts, while others transmit to everyone.
2/
After admitting to the heterogeneity, he cautions we "have to be careful not to draw conclusions" from these superspreaders... eg. Chalet (73% SAR), Choir (53%), and Diamond Princess (58.9%). He suggests there were "extenuating circumstances", and seems to dismiss them. 🧐
3/