Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Lazarus Long Profile picture
@LazarusLong13
Jul 10, 2024 • 21 tweets • 10 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
This study is HUGE FOR YOU!

Why? Every hospital, dental, and nursing home corporation around the world use studies designed by the Mark Loeb Group to keep N95s off of your HCW.

As they bend over you in a mask so baggy you can see their toothy smile.

Let me ask you...

/1
Would pulling on an N95 protect you more from airborne anthrax than if you pulled on a medical mask (MM)? From only 3 feet away?

In fact, IT IS AGAINST the proper use of respirators.

OSHA would have you KICKED off the job site.

But when Loeb did it in 2022? The $$$ 🎉🎉🎉
But - once this preprint is published? I do not see how Loeb (2022) is not RETRACTED.🔥🔥🔥

That study compared surgical masks to N95s. It said that surgical (medical) masks are as good as N95s in protection from Covid.

That they are not inferior, aka noninferior, to N95s.
And this stone-cold evisceration of the Loeb group who richly deserve it?

Is a thing of savage beauty.

Starting with - how do you not get infected 3 feet away from some feverish (febrile) C0Vid infected?

(Plus, the 58% asymptomatic transmissions? )
Image
Image
But Loeb's group said, "No way, man. Our people were rolling strapped! From the parking lot to the parking lot." (Universal masking***).

Now, this is where it gets good.

Someone👇 confirmed with a Loeb study member that the N95 group could use medical masks in hallways.
Post-hoc assertions that the trial was carried out with all subjects in the N95 arm wearing their PPE continuously are unsupported by evidence: The claim is not supported by prospectively registered information;(65–67) The claim is not consistent with the initial study protocol;(64) The study ended March 29th, 2022, yet the modified statistical analysis plan dated February 17th, 2022 and the modified protocol dated March 1st 2022(64) both specify that subgroup analyses would include sites with and without universal masking; Despite being fundamental to the interpretation of the trial result...
Dr. Lynora Saxinger MD FRCPC Infectious Diseases @AntibioticDoc · Dec 2, 2022 **So it’s all gotten a bit leggy but if you are entering here I did confirm and need to clarify continuous masking didn’t have to be assigned mask so N95 group could use medical masks in hallways etc so is not a “all shift” N95 which is what I’d understood from a studymember
And the people in medical masks could wear N95s anytime they wanted.

Got it? This supposedly very methodological study has people switching anytime they wanted. Participants in the MM arm were allowed to wear N95 at any time based on point of care risk assessment.(58) Considering that the most COVID-cautious participants would have had both the greatest motivation to report and seek treatment for suspected infection; and to take advantage of the opportunity to wear N95 if assigned to the MM arm, it would be expected that these factors would interact to further artefactually reduce cases recorded in the MM arm.
And their OWN PLAN said they would have sites with and without universal masking.

Until they changed it after the fact.

AFTER THE FACT! Can we trust them? Surely they have no incentive to lie like rugs, right?

No UNREPORTED conflicts of interests like 7 million dead.

The claim is not consistent with the initial study protocol;(64) The study ended March 29th, 2022, yet the modified statistical analysis plan dated February 17th, 2022 and the modified protocol dated March 1st 2022(64) both specify that subgroup analyses would include sites with and without universal masking;
As noted above, the trial was explicitly designed around an inappropriate intermittent-use protocol – a fatal flaw from which unregistered protocol modifications and coincidental universal use are claimed to have salvaged it. Retroactive insertion into the registry with back-dating to the beginning of the trial (a repudiation of the purpose of trial registration) does not provide the evidence such claims require.
Unreported conflicts of interest As discussed above, COVID is known to be substantially airborne, transmitted in infectious bioaerosols.(3) Anticipated in the earliest days of the pandemic, this danger was overlooked by policy makers at great cost(2) - a “…very big mistake” where better decisions “…would have saved an enormous number of lives”.(116) Seven million deaths have now been officially attributed directly to COVID, with the real total estimated at 27 million(117) and possibly much higher,(118) and millions more suffer long-term impacts from Post Covid Condition (PCC).(119–123) Any ...
No conflicts of interest at all, like 16 study members running IPC at their hospital. No pressure from needing to be proved right. No pressure to keep costs low as N95s are spendy!

None like testifying at a trial to deny nurses N95s. With 5 study members.
Sixteen of the authors as well as two of the three members of the Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) hold Medical Director of Infection Control (MDIC) or similar positions at their respective institutions (Table 1). Of these, nine (including the DSMB Chair) are located in the province of Ontario, where in 2021 the Ontario Nurses’ Association requested judicial review of hospital infection control policies they asserted were dangerously inadequate in failing to provide for universal use of N95 respirators.(100,127) Similar positions regarding SARS-CoV-2 mitigations had been taken nation...
Endorsed shortly before the end of data collection for the Loeb trial in Canada, the affidavit also included the statement: “…our experience at my hospital and other healthcare facilities throughout Canada where use of medical mask and eye protection alone to care for an unmasked patient with unrecognized COVID- 19, has not resulted in transmission to healthcare workers.”(127) It is unclear how the members of the DSMB reconciled endorsing this statement as accurate with the then-current trial data they were responsible for being aware of, showing multiple infections in healthcare workers we...
None like running THE group that the WORLD listened to for a year of death. Or being a member. Senior author Dr. Conly chairs the WHO Infection Prevention and Control Research and Development Expert Group for COVID-19 (WHO-C19-EG – of which Dr. Loeb was also a member),(131) upon whose advice the WHO’s position on COVID prevention was largely based in the first year of the pandemic.(132) This group had publicly argued against the need to adopt “…the precautionary principle with consequent use of particulate respirators instead of medical masks as a component of PPE for routine care of COVID- 19 patients…” in August 2020,(125) despite previously receiving direct warnings to the contrar...
No, when the study was abruptly moved from Canada to Egypt, Israel, Pakistan, just as clear evidence was emerging that N95s were better than MM? Nothing suspicious.

And Egypt ending up being the location for finding surgical masks are the same as N95s?
When the study was terminated at all sites in the prospectively registered countries, the results showed clear evidence of a result opposite to the primary published finding, showing medical masks very likely provided substantially reduced protection against a pathogen with potential to cause death or serious harm.
The reported finding of noninferiority is entirely an artefact of the data from sites in Egypt, and cannot be obtained without them even if we were to accept all other alterations to the trial as legitimate.
Nothing against Egypt, it's just where serious issues with women being forced to work, men in N95s, bad ventilation, public transportation in the middle of the first Omicron wave, all caused that effect.

Although... The omission of site information from the published information and the trial registry is particularly relevant in Egypt, as only one of the six sites was equipped with an HVAC system (in contrast to 100% of sites elsewhere, per Supplement Table 11),(58) with the other five provided only with “…a combination of air conditioning and outdoor air”. Without further information this could mean simply openable windows and some recirculating air conditioners, which would tend to encourage closing of the windows while providing essentially no air cleaning – the worst combination possible in the pre...
The actual data collected was sketch AF. "Perfectly excluded" is not a good phrase to hear about your study.

You been busted, son! Is a rough translation. The pattern observed in the data reported by Loeb and colleagues appears highly unlikely (p<0.006) to occur naturally in data collected as described in the publication.
Nothing like a few changes to a study👇. Between 16 IPC directors, you'd think they'd kick all kinds of study a$$, instead of needing midstream changes.

There is more, but I am tired of reading about the Canadian IPC Mafia.

They are very bad people who did a very bad study. Image
That should be retracted!

They did it! Called for retraction!



/Continued with some thoughts. acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.73…
Image
Actual care exposure time to patients in Egypt was about double (very important, not mentioned)?

It has all the outbreaks (mentioned in the study)
Image
Image
One factor everyone seems to have missed? Maybe I just didn't see it?

Extended use AND re-use of the N95s does not seem to have been factored in.

Fit failure is a huge issue.👇

Loeb does a self-own on this in commenting on his own study.
healthresearch.healthsci.mcmaster.ca/surgical-masks…



Image
Image
Image
Image
Universal masking was not fully explained in the study.

Parking lot to parking lot?

UM in Egypt, Pakistan, Canada - might be all different.

For example, Japan, this hospital had universal masking, but not in break rooms. Led to infections.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
Image
Pakistani where PATIENTS did not adhere to universal masking (UM), despite beng requird to.

Obviously, patients are aerosol src. Also, the antimaskers at the Loeb group included ACH at the various places. THAT IS NOT MEASURED ACH. There is a
researchgate.net/profile/Saerah…
huge difference - if you ask someone actually experienced with aerosols.

Changing rooms in hospitals - we have no idea of the Egypt set up.


We do know Egyptian HCWs are pretty good at masking up at work. Not in public.
journals.lww.com/joem/fulltext/…
ijic.info/article/view/2…

Image
Image
Loeb (2022), truly one of the worst studies ever. Giving Walach a run for his money.
My apologies, I forgot to link to the top of the thread for your convenience!

Thank you for getting to here and now knowing how the latest masking RCT is fatally flawed.

The other two main ones are also flawed in the main same way. 3 feet.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Lazarus Long

Lazarus Long Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LazarusLong13

Lazarus Long Profile picture
Feb 23
Great interview of Ed Yong - I am just covering the C0V1D part.

/1 The Interview Ed Yong Wants to Show You the Hidden Reality of the World Ed standing with his arms folded. His eyes tell you COVID is not over.
You've been clear in saying that C0V1D has not gone away. You ask people to wear masks at your events..... You’ve been clear in saying that Covid has not gone away. You ask people to wear masks at your events. But that attitude is not necessarily where the rest of the world is. How do you think about continuing to take precautions and advising others to do so when it feels as if society has moved on? I do it for a bunch of reasons. Firstly, I have learned that I enjoy not being sick. I know that the cost of long Covid is real and substantial, and I don’t want to run that risk lightly.
"I think it makes a huge difference to them to have the person at the front of the stage wear a mask. It tells them, It’s not weird." . I also know that I have many friends and people I’m close to who are immunocompromised. So for the sake of the people around me, I also don’t want to get sick. When I do events, I wear a mask for those reasons, and because I know that every time I do a talk, while the vast majority of people in the audience have probably moved on, there are going to be other people who haven’t. I think it makes a huge difference to them to have the person at the front of the stage wear a mask. It tells them, It’s not weird. So I do it for that reason, too. In terms of holding this line at a point when a l...
Read 5 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Feb 22
I am sorry if this will upset you. A lot of people depend on NASAL SPRAYS for C0V1D.

I have been iffy on them, but viewed them as "if they don't hurt, why not" but not for me.

There's an analysis
on Reddit that you should read in detail, and make up your own mind.
/1
Here is the link:


Here is a 4 tweet TLDR version.

Here is how it starts - the author goes HARD at the underlying studies. reddit.com/r/ZeroCovidCom…There is no convincing evidence that nasal sprays prevent COVID-19 There is a lot of misinformation out there about nasal sprays preventing COVID-19. Unfortunately, there are no convincing studies showing that nasal sprays prevent COVID-19. The published studies investigating whether or not nasal sprays prevent COVID-19 each have major issues, which I will detail here. I have a PhD in biochemistry and one of my PhD projects was on COVID-19. The main takeaway of this post is that there is no sound evidence that nasal sprays prevent COVID-19. Thus, nasal sprays should not be used for COVID-...
Some pretty harsh language, but to me the important thing is we still have clean air.

Which is good, because it boils down to only 2 studies saying that nasal sprays work, per them. 5. Summary/TLDR and final thoughts Unfortunately, many people including covid influencers have fallen for the grift of nasal sprays preventing COVID-19. Some such influencers have promoted these nasal sprays for free and helped spread the misinformation that they prevent COVID-19. Unlike with nasal sprays, there is ample, sound evidence that high-quality well-fitting respirators, ventilation and air purification prevent COVID-19. The human clinical trials testing whether or not nasal sprays prevent COVID-19 are garbage, and to my knowledge there are only two! Please don't lower your covid...
Read 7 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Feb 17
Guillain-Barre Syndrome linked to poultry eggs? H5N1?!

The BBC had a good article from February 3 that talks about how these Indian states' cases are linked to campylobacter jejuni, a bacteria. It IS the most common root-cause, globally.

And IT is commonly found in poultry. AVOID CHICKEN AND EGGS RIGHT NOW SIGN showing for the country of India in a tweet from @alwaysmadesh. Due to Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
"Campylobacter jejuni infection is the common associated microorganism (25–40%), followed by cytomegalovirus (6–15%), Mycoplasma pneumoniae (3–21%), and Haemophilus influenzae (1–9%)"

BTW - Cytomegalovirus is also an airborne virus - that just happens to cause brain cancer.
Mycoplasma pneumoniae - also airborne.

And...drum roll please...Campylobacter jejuni also airborne.

Don't get me wrong - jejuni most definitely is also fecal-oral, no question.

But it's also airborne.

Sampled from the air below. Figure 7. GCN/m3 results using microorganism-specific primers. These microorganisms were chosen for their pathogenic and opportunistic nature. Samples 1–12 indicate the WWC collections in House A, 1R–12R the WWC collections in House B and 1F–12F the filter collections in House A.
Read 11 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Feb 13
Just a little bit closer to acknowledging H5N1 is airborne.

3 vets asymptomatic, + for bird flu antibodies. Did not wear respiratory gear or glasses.

Did wear gloves and coveralls - so rules out fomites.

One practicing in states with NO H5N1.

Vets get very close to /1 No seropositive practitioner knew that they were working with dairy cattle with known or suspected HPAI A(H5) infection. None of the seropositive practitioners reported wearing respiratory or eye protection while providing veterinary care to cattle. Neither respiratory or eye protection is recommended when working with uninfected animals in regions without confirmed cases; however, safety goggles and a respirator are recommended when working with uninfected animals in regions where there are confirmed or potentially infected animals (4).
Among 150 bovine veterinary practitioners, three had evidence of recent infection with HPAI A(H5) virus, including one who only practiced in two states (Georgia and South Carolina) with no known HPAI A(H5) virus infection in cattle and no reported human cases (1,2); this practitioner reported no exposures to animals with known or suspected HPAI A(H5) virus infections. These findings suggest that there might be HPAI A(H5) virus–infected dairy cattle in states where infection in dairy cattle has not yet been identified, highlighting the importance of rapid identification of infected dairy cat...
aerosol sources. Aerosol orifices.

This lines up with previous studies.

"93% glove usage and 85% boot covers would have stopped transmission" 93% glove usage and 85% boot covers would have stopped transmission CDC PPE Study of Dairy Workers Infected. 11/7/2024 Dairy workers exposed to ill cows during the week after A(H5N1) virus detection reported higher use of gloves (93%), boots or boot covers (83%), head or hair covers (79%), and eye protection (76%) compared with those who reported exposure to ill cows in the week before detection of HPAI A(H5N1). Reported use of N95 FFRs or other respirators and other types of masks was low (9% and 27%, respectively) among workers exposed to ill cows the week before A(H5N1) outbreaks were d...
CDC PPE Study of Dairy Workers Infected. 11/7/2024 Dairy workers exposed to ill cows during the week after A(H5N1) virus detection reported higher use of gloves (93%), boots or boot covers (83%), head or hair covers (79%), and eye protection (76%) compared with those who reported exposure to ill cows in the week before detection of HPAI A(H5N1). Reported use of N95 FFRs or other respirators and other types of masks was low (9% and 27%, respectively) among workers exposed to ill cows the week before A(H5N1) outbreaks were detected, with higher usage reported among exposed workers in the week...
Veterinarians are one possible vector between infected and uninfected herds/ farms.
Read 4 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Feb 13
Latest Pew Poll.

Or an exercise on "How well did Biden disappear C0V1D?"

On one hand, 21% of Americans still view C0V1D as a major public threat 21% of Americans still view COVID as a major public threat.
On the other hand, still masking?

6% of Democrats
4% Americans
2% Republicans

Guess when Biden took over on the graph? On the other hand, still masking? 6% of Democrats 4% Americans 2% Republicans Guess when Biden took over on the graph?
Yes - pretty much as soon as Biden took over, he began disappearing C0V1D.

BTW, the last poll was by yougov - masking was at 12% last year. On the other hand, still masking? 6% of Democrats 4% Americans 2% Republicans Guess when Biden took over on the graph?
Read 12 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Feb 11
What do we need to do to make every healthcare worker in the world understand that flu is airborne?

Get IPC on board.

Let me introduce you to Dr. Zahir Hirji, President of @IPACCanada at #IPAC2023.

Where do we know him from?

That's a very interesting question.

/1 Image
In 2006, Dr. Tellier wrote an article in the CDC EID explaining that influenza was airborne via aerosols.

Quite nicely done.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC33…
Dr. Zahir Hirji and some other IPC doctors from the Canadian HUGE University Health Network disagreed.

Right back you, Tellier - in 2007.

wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/13…Camille Lemieux*Comments to Author , Gabrielle Brankston*1, Leah Gitterman*, Zahir Hirji*, and Michael Gardam*† Author affiliations: *University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; †University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(