/sci/ - Science & Math

What was it? Pic related.

>>12115307
Masks are just a conspiracy theory. The experts say you don't actually need to wear them.

>>12112088
>A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the US CDC found that face masks had no effect, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control. (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article))

>A July 2020 review by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medince found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth masks against virus infection or transmission. (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/))

>An April 2020 review by two US professors in respiratory and infectious disease from the University of Illinois concluded that face masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). (https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data))

>An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 came to the conclusion that cloth face masks offer little to no protection in everyday life. (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372))

>An April 2020 Cochrane review (preprint) found that face masks in the general population or health care workers didn’t reduce influenza-like illness (ILI) cases. (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2))

>An April 2020 review by the Norwich School of Medicine (preprint) found that “the evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks”, but supports the use of masks by “particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.” (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1))

>A July 2020 study by Japanese researchers found that cloth masks “offer zero protection against coronavirus” due to their large pore size and generally poor fit. (http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13523664))

>>12109796

>A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the US CDC found that face masks had no effect, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control. (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article))

>A July 2020 review by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medince found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth masks against virus infection or transmission. (https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/))

An April 2020 review by two US professors in respiratory and infectious disease from the University of Illinois concluded that face masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). (https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data))

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 came to the conclusion that cloth face masks offer little to no protection in everyday life. (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372))

An April 2020 Cochrane review (preprint) found that face masks in the general population or health care workers didn’t reduce influenza-like illness (ILI) cases. (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2))

An April 2020 review by the Norwich School of Medicine (preprint) found that “the evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks”, but supports the use of masks by “particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.” (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1))

A July 2020 study by Japanese researchers found that cloth masks “offer zero protection against coronavirus” due to their large pore size and generally poor fit. (http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13523664))