indoc.JPG

Covid Hysteria 

America’s Frontline Doctors

A group of American doctors calling themselves “America’s Frontline Doctors” held a press conference on COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine, and more outside the Supreme Court of the United States.

  • The results showed that cloth masks and other fabric materials tested in the study had 40-90% instantaneous penetration levels against polydisperse NaCl aerosols employed in the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health particulate respirator test protocol at 5.5 cm s⁻¹. Similarly, varying levels of penetrations (9-98%) were obtained for different size monodisperse NaCl aerosol particles in the 20-1000 nm range.

Fig. 2. 

Polydisperse NaCl aerosol penetration levels for sweatshirts and T-shirts at two different face velocities. Error bars indicate 95% confidence level.

Unmasking the Science

Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 – 419.

  • “A total of six RCTs involving 9,171 participants were included. There were no statistically significant differences in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza, laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza-like illness using N95 respirators and surgical masks. Meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of N95 respirators against laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000887077 A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.

  • Conclusions This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.

 JAMA. 2019;322(9):824-833. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.11645 N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

  • Conclusions and relevance: Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.

Ann Occup Hyg. 2010;54(7):789-798. doi:10.1093/annhyg/meq044 Simple Respiratory Protection--Evaluation of the Filtration Performance of Cloth Masks and Common Fabric Materials Against 20-1000 Nm Size Particles.

  • The results showed that cloth masks and other fabric materials tested in the study had 40-90% instantaneous penetration levels against polydisperse NaCl aerosols employed in the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health particulate respirator test protocol at 5.5 cm s⁻¹. Similarly, varying levels of penetrations (9-98%) were obtained for different size monodisperse NaCl aerosol particles in the 20-1000 nm range.

Fig. 1. 

Polydisperse NaCl aerosol penetration levels for cloth masks at two different face velocities. Error bars indicate 95% confidence level.

Fig. 2. 

Polydisperse NaCl aerosol penetration levels for sweatshirts and T-shirts at two different face velocities. Error bars indicate 95% confidence level.

Fig. 3. 

Polydisperse NaCl aerosol penetration levels for towels and scarves at two different face velocities. Error bars indicate 95% confidence level.

Fig. 4. 

Monodisperse aerosol penetration levels for cloth masks at two different face velocities. Error bars indicate 95% confidence level (closed symbols, TSI 3160 and open symbols, SMPS).

Fig. 5. 

Monodisperse aerosol penetration levels at two different face velocities for sweatshirts (a and b) and T-shirts (c and d). Error bars indicate 95% confidence level. (closed symbols, TSI 3160 and open symbols, SMPS).

Fig. 6. 

Monodisperse aerosol penetration levels at two different face velocities for towels (a and b) and scarves (c and d). Error bars indicate 95% confidence level. (closed symbols, TSI 3160 and open symbols, SMPS).

The Annals of Occupational Hygiene, Volume 54, Issue 7, October 2010, Pages 789–798 Simple Respiratory Protection—Evaluation of the Filtration Performance of Cloth Masks and Common Fabric Materials Against 20–1000 nm Size Particles. 

  • Average penetration levels for the three different cloth masks were between 74 and 90%, while N95 filter media controls showed 0.12% at 5.5 cm s−1 face velocity (Fig. 1). The penetration levels increased significantly for the N95 control filter media but remained <5%, while none of the fabric materials showed any significant increase at 16.5 cm s−1 face velocity. Figure 2 shows polydisperse aerosol penetration levels for sweatshirts and T-shirts. Of the three sweatshirts, one model (Hanes) showed 40% penetration level at 5.5 cm s−1, which increased to 57% at 16.5 cm s−1 face velocity.

Review of the Medical Literature


Here are key anchor points to the extensive scientific literature that establishes that wearing surgical masks and respirators (e.g., “N95”) does not reduce the risk of contracting a verified illness:

  • N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.

Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456.

  • None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.

bin-Reza et al. (2012) “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267.

  • “There were 17 eligible studies. … None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”

Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016

  • “We identified six clinical studies … . In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.”

Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) “Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934–1942.

  • “Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significant”; as per Fig. 2c therein: 

Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) “N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824–833.

  • “Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. ... Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

Long, Y. et al. (2020) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1- 9.

Unmasking the Science

  • Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%.

  • This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.

  • “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection." -The New England Journal of Medicine

  • "The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal." -The New England Journal of Medicine

  • "In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic." -The New England Journal of Medicine

  • -Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H., Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H., Julia Sinclair, M.B.A., Madelyn Pearson, D.N.P., R.N., and Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.

Unmasking the Science

Endogenous Deficiency of Glutathione as the Most Likely Cause of Serious Manifestations and Death in COVID-19 Patients

Flaws in Coronavirus Pandemic Theory

CALIFORNIA DOCTORS DEBUNK COVID-19 MEDIA HYSTERIA (FULL VIDEO)

Two doctors, Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi, co-owners of Accelerated Urgent Care

YouTube censored this video because it contradicted the government-sanctioned position on how to deal with Covid-19

Perspectives on the Pandemic | The (Undercover) Epicenter Nurse

Judy Mikovits has a Ph.D. in biochemistry and molecular biology from George Washington University

Plandemic

vs.JPG

©2020 Home Hosted by Balmighty. In GOD we trust.