1042 replies to this topic

[Florin]

I thought there was some evidence of seasonality, due to the fact that Australia had a huge peak of coronavirus deaths in July/August/Sept, which is winter in Australia, but summertime in the northern hemisphere. See the Australian Worldometer. That's one example of a seasonal effect.

 
South America, Australia, and Europe follow what seems to be a seasonal pattern, but not Asia or North America. So, seasonality could be an illusion.

Edited by Florin, 08 January 2021 - 01:42 AM.

[Hip]

 South America, Australia, and Europe follow what seems to be a seasonal pattern, but not Asia or North America. 

 

One would have to look deeper to determine what factors within changing seasons might actually play a role in modulating coronavirus transmission rates.

 

Factors include temperature, humidity, sunshine levels, etc. These factors might have a direct effect on the virus (eg UV from sunlight kills the virus), but also indirect effects. For example, lower sunshine levels also means lower vitamin D in the population; that's an indirect effect. Lower temperature might equate to people spending more time indoors rather than outdoors, and being indoors may spread the virus faster. Winter also means central heating in some parts of the world, which lowers indoor humidity. Lots of complex factors to take into account.

Edited by Hip, 08 January 2021 - 01:55 AM.

[Florin]

Interestingly though, this study found that because P100 filters typically have more resistance to air flow than N95 filters, if there is any leakage around the mask edges due to a poor fit, the P100 actually lets in more leaked (unfiltered) air than the N95, because of the higher suction pressure created by the higher air resistance of P100s.
 
And if P100 filters typically have more resistance to air flow than N95 filters, that might make breathing slightly more difficult with a P100, unless you can find a P100 filter which is designed for lower air resistance.

Supposedly, the 2291 is a lower-resistance P100 filter, and anecdotally, I feel no difference between the 2291 and a N95 cartridge filter.

 

https://multimedia.3...863-2-HR_R2.pdf

[Florin]

 
South America, Australia, and Europe follow what seems to be a seasonal pattern, but not Asia or North America. So, seasonality could be an illusion.

 

On second thought, South America looks seasonal only until November. Yet more evidence against seasonality.

[Hip]

Supposedly, the 2291 is a lower-resistance P100 filter, and anecdotally, I feel no difference between the 2291 and a N95 cartridge filter.

 

https://multimedia.3...863-2-HR_R2.pdf

 

Interesting.

 

I am considering buying this silicone respirator, as it looks sleeker and less Darth Vader than most, and it is described as having P100 (aka P3) filters with low breathing resistance.

[Florin]

But why wouldn't one want to look more like Darth Vader? It might even help with social distancing in case the wearer forgets to shave.
 
Anyway, that respirator's head strap isn't so great: it lacks the oval-shaped plastic headpiece that more securely hugs the head. It also lacks the ability to use other kinds of filters that eliminate certain kinds of gases (if you want to use the respirator to avoid stuff like odors or paint fumes).

[pamojja]

Do you think India is located in the Southern Hemisphere? No? In that case, this is the opposite prediction of what seasonality would indicate based on temps.

 

If you're referring to humidity, that's different, and I'd like to see some stats about that.

 

I'm referring to the research of Hope-Simpson, who found that seasonality of respiratory infection is distinct between Northern temperate (N. 30"+), Northern tropical (N. 0-29"), Soutern tropical (S. 0-29") and again Southern temperate (S. 30"+) latitudes. Already posted 3 days ago as a response to you in an other threat.
 

Influenza and its seasonality has been studied by a guy with the name R. Edgar Hope-Simson for half a century, culminating in the book: The transmission of Epidemic Influenza. The different seasons for different latitudes examplified on page 96 of its PDF-version:

 

 Screenshot_20210105-124217.png   212.1KB   0 downloads

Since the US spans across different latitudes, one can see both in their graphs.

Ivor Cummins talks about it for many months already, and somewhere has a download-link to the whole book, which I can't find at the moment.


edit: uploaded and attached below

11th-The-Transmission-of-Influenza-BOOK.pdf

 

India is located between the N. 8 and 37", thereby for the most part falling into the Northern tropical zone. Only the northern-most states of Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh are already in the Northern temperate zone, additionally at high altitudes of the Himalaya mountains. But relatively sparsely populated, therefore not really showing in Indias' Covid graph.

 

In the US only the states of Florida and Texas are in the Northern Tropical zone with their distinct seasonality. The remaining states are all in the Northern Temperate zone. The slight hump during the summer-months in US' covid graph derives however from the seasonality of those southern-most US states.

 

Edited by pamojja, 08 January 2021 - 11:38 AM.

[Hip]

But why wouldn't one want to look more like Darth Vader? It might even help with social distancing in case the wearer forgets to shave.

 
Certainly if I can find a Darth Vader-looking respirator which comes with a free light saber, I'm buying it. Nothing like a good light saber to ensure a 2 meter social distance!
 
Appearance is important, though, and I am surprised nobody has marketed a respirator that's actually designed with esthetics in mind: this would probably increase wearing compliance.

 

You can get designer cloth face coverings, but I have not seen many respirators that have good esthetics. Using transparent silicone would be good, because this will not obscure as much of the face. Obscuring the face means you cannot see other people's facial expressions, and that's bad. 
 
This see-thru silicone respirator from MIT is good in that respect, but I have not seen it for sale.
 
 
 

Anyway, that respirator's head strap isn't so great: it lacks the oval-shaped plastic headpiece that more securely hugs the head. It also lacks the ability to use other kinds of filters that eliminate certain kinds of gases (if you want to use the respirator to avoid stuff like odors or paint fumes).

 
So the 3M mask you linked to above has interchangeable filters, can you can use filters to remove VOCs when painting the house? That would be useful for after the pandemic is over. This appears to be the range of 3M filter types, from particle filters to gas filters.

 

But I am not prepared to look like Darth Vader — unless I get a free light saber...

 

 

Edited by Hip, 08 January 2021 - 02:43 PM.

[Florin]

I'm referring to the research of Hope-Simpson, who found that seasonality of respiratory infection is distinct between Northern temperate (N. 30"+), Northern tropical (N. 0-29"), Soutern tropical (S. 0-29") and again Southern temperate (S. 30"+) latitudes. Already posted 3 days ago as a response to you in an other threat.
 

 

India is located between the N. 8 and 37", thereby for the most part falling into the Northern tropical zone. Only the northern-most states of Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh are already in the Northern temperate zone, additionally at high altitudes of the Himalaya mountains. But relatively sparsely populated, therefore not really showing in Indias' Covid graph.

 

In the US only the states of Florida and Texas are in the Northern Tropical zone with their distinct seasonality. The remaining states are all in the Northern Temperate zone. The slight hump during the summer-months in US' covid graph derives however from the seasonality of those southern-most US states.

 

 

You're still having trouble reading charts and maps. Your chart indicates that influenza only peaks during Q3 in the SOUTHERN tropical zone. India's Covid activity peaked in Q3 but it's located in the NORTHERN zones. This is the opposite of influenza seasonality.

 

There's no influenza activity in any US State during the Summer.

[Florin]

So the 3M mask you linked to above has interchangeable filters, can you can use filters to remove VOCs when painting the house? That would be useful for after the pandemic is over. This appears to be the range of 3M filter types, from particle filters to gas filters.

 

Yes. One of the links I provided has more info on the different types of filters. You might also need to check 3M's UK site to get the right filters, in case if they're using different naming conventions.

[pamojja]

I'm referring to the research of Hope-Simpson, who found that seasonality of respiratory infection is distinct between Northern temperate (N. 30"+), Northern tropical (N. 0-29"), Soutern tropical (S. 0-29") and again Southern temperate (S. 30"+) latitudes. Already posted 3 days ago as a response to you in an other threat.
 
India is located between the N. 8 and 37", thereby for the most part falling into the Northern tropical zone. Only the northern-most states of Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh are already in the Northern temperate zone, additionally at high altitudes of the Himalaya mountains. But relatively sparsely populated, therefore not really showing in Indias' Covid graph.

You're still having trouble reading charts and maps.

The carts - which indicates the average of influenza seasons from year 1964 to 1974 in 4 major zones of latitudes - shows the following:

Northern temperate (N. 30"+): Peak in January and Q1 of the year. Some activity from September to June (end of Q3 until beginning of Q2).

Northern tropical (N. 0-29"): Peaks December to January. Some activity troughout the whole year, and lesser peaks in March, June, September and October (Q1-Q4).

Southern tropical (S. 0-29"): Peaks in June. Some activity throughout the whole year, lesser peaks in March, May and July (Q1-Q4).

Southern temperate (S. 30"+): Opposite to N.Temperate, Peak in July and Q3 of the year. Some activity from April to December (Q2-Q4).

Your chart indicates that influenza only peaks during Q3 in the SOUTHERN tropical zone. India's Covid activity peaked in Q3 but it's located in the NORTHERN zones. This is the opposite of influenza seasonality.

You meant to say: ..influenza only peaks during Q3 in the Southern TEMPERATE zone?

You're also not considering the context: that this chart is only the average of 11 years. There are many factors confounding these latitudal approximations. Like: population density, altitude, humidity and temparatures. Therefore no year or region could ever show exactly the same.

India's steep rise in covid cases started with June (assuming they didn't missed most before by inconsistent testing), peaked by September, and decreased down to its levels of June again by December.

Addmitedly best fitting Southern Temperate, not at all with Northern Temperate, but enough fitting the lesser peaks featured in the Northern tropical zone pattern. Not contradicting but confirming this seasonal model overall again.

In the US only the states of Florida and Texas are in the Northern Tropical zone with their distinct seasonality. The remaining states are all in the Northern Temperate zone. The slight hump during the summer-months in US' covid graph derives however from the seasonality of those southern-most US states.

There's no influenza activity in any US State during the Summer.

No, there isn't influenza activity anywhere in the world now. See this youtube for details:

https://www.youtube....h?v=p_vAQyVlXzU

But there is analogous covid activity as in the Southern temperate zone especially in Texas and Florida, giving its signature to the overall US covid-mortality graph.

 PSX_20210110_150549.jpg   68.67KB   0 downloads

 PSX_20210110_150631.jpg   60.49KB   0 downloads

[Florin]

You meant to say: ..influenza only peaks during Q3 in the Southern TEMPERATE zone?

 
Yes, southern temperate. The bottom line is that it's in the SOUTHERN Hemisphere.
 

You're also not considering the context: that this chart is only the average of 11 years. There are many factors confounding these latitudal approximations. Like: population density, altitude, humidity and temparatures. Therefore no year or region could ever show exactly the same.

 
If you don't like what your own chart says, why don't you provide a better one?
 

India's steep rise in covid cases started with June (assuming they didn't missed most before by inconsistent testing), peaked by September, and decreased down to its levels of June again by December.

Addmitedly best fitting Southern Temperate, not at all with Northern Temperate, but enough fitting the lesser peaks featured in the Northern tropical zone pattern. Not contradicting but confirming this seasonal model overall again.

 
No, deaths started to rise in April and peaked in September. That doesn't fit with your influenza chart at all.
 

 

No, there isn't influenza activity anywhere in the world now. See this youtube for details:

https://www.youtube....h?v=p_vAQyVlXzU

But there is analogous covid activity as in the Southern temperate zone especially in Texas and Florida, giving its signature to the overall US covid-mortality graph.

PSX_20210110_150549.jpg

PSX_20210110_150631.jpg

The point is that the States which had the Summer peak never have peaks of influenza in the Summer. Therefore, that's the opposite of what seasonality would predict just like in India's case.

[pamojja]

You're also not considering the context: that this chart is only the average of 11 years. There are many factors confounding these latitudal approximations. Like: population density, altitude, humidity and temparatures. Therefore no year or region could ever show exactly the same.

If you don't like what your own chart says, why don't you provide a better one?

Complexity and variation in biological systems is they way it is, nothing to do with preferences. Which I actually do prefer: No one year exactly the same as the preceeding, but still with distinct seasonal patterns.

It rather seems too difficult for you considering various confounders at the same time. And as it always plays out in real life. This chart is the best it could be portrayed, for those not in the want of blinding out real-life complexity and variations.

India's steep rise in covid cases started with June (assuming they didn't missed most before by inconsistent testing), peaked by September, and decreased down to its levels of June again by December.

Addmitedly best fitting Southern Temperate, not at all with Northern Temperate, but enough fitting the lesser peaks featured in the Northern tropical zone pattern. Not contradicting but confirming this seasonal model overall again.

No, deaths started to rise in April and peaked in September. That doesn't fit with your influenza chart at all.

Again, I said 'step rise'. And it still does fit with the lesser peaks during Q2+Q3 in the Northern Tropical zone. However much you would like to deny that.

The point is that the States which had the Summer peak never have peaks of influenza in the Summer. Therefore, that's the opposite of what seasonality would predict just like in India's case.

Well, I gave as reference a PDF-version of a whole book by a scientist researching seasonal respiratory infections over the course of half a century.

What is the reference or source for your statement: "..the States which had the Summer peak never have peaks of influenza in the Summer"?

Edited by pamojja, 10 January 2021 - 10:07 PM.

[Florin]

Complexity and variation in biological systems is they way it is, nothing to do with preferences. Which I actually do prefer: No one year exactly the same as the preceeding, but still with distinct seasonal patterns.

It rather seems too difficult for you considering various confounders at the same time. And as it always plays out in real life. This chart is the best it could be portrayed, for those not in the want of blinding out real-life complexity and variations.

Again, I said 'step rise'. And it still does fit with the lesser peaks during Q2+Q3 in the Northern Tropical zone. However much you would like to deny that.

The major peak in the northern tropical zone is in Q4 but in India it's in Q3. Your claim is completely wrong.
 

Well, I gave as reference a PDF-version of a whole book by a scientist researching seasonal respiratory infections over the course of half a century.

What is the reference or source for your statement: "..the States which had the Summer peak never have peaks of influenza in the Summer"?

This is common knowledge if you know anything about the influenza season in the US. Your claim is completely wrong here as well.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/...4a3.htm#F2_down

https://www.dshs.tex...a/surveillance/

https://www.dshs.tex...19Wk39Oct04.pdf

 

Edited by Florin, 11 January 2021 - 03:18 AM.

[geo12the]

I came across this article which might be of interest in discussions of seasonality and COVID:

 

https://www.mdpi.com...-4601/18/2/396 

 

Weather Variability and COVID-19 Transmission: A Review of Recent Research

Hannah McClymont Wenbiao Hu

 

School of Public Health and Social Work, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(2), 396; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020396

Received: 13 November 2020 / Revised: 4 January 2021 / Accepted: 5 January 2021 / Published: 6 January 2021

(This article belongs to the Section Climate Change and Health)

Abstract

Weather and climate play a significant role in infectious disease transmission, through changes to transmission dynamics, host susceptibility and virus survival in the environment. Exploring the association of weather variables and COVID-19 transmission is vital in understanding the potential for seasonality and future outbreaks and developing early warning systems. Previous research examined the effects of weather on COVID-19, but the findings appeared inconsistent. This review aims to summarize the currently available literature on the association between weather and COVID-19 incidence and provide possible suggestions for developing weather-based early warning system for COVID-19 transmission. Studies eligible for inclusion used ecological methods to evaluate associations between weather (i.e., temperature, humidity, wind speed and rainfall) and COVID-19 transmission. The review showed that temperature was reported as significant in the greatest number of studies, with COVID-19 incidence increasing as temperature decreased and the highest incidence reported in the temperature range of 0–17 °C. Humidity was also significantly associated with COVID-19 incidence, though the reported results were mixed, with studies reporting positive and negative correlation. A significant interaction between humidity and temperature was also reported. Wind speed and rainfall results were not consistent across studies. Weather variables including temperature and humidity can contribute to increased transmission of COVID-19, particularly in winter conditions through increased host susceptibility and viability of the virus. While there is less indication of an association with wind speed and rainfall, these may contribute to behavioral changes that decrease exposure and risk of infection. Understanding the implications of associations with weather variables and seasonal variations for monitoring and control of future outbreaks is essential for early warning systems.

Edited by geo12the, 11 January 2021 - 04:12 AM.

[Heisok]

Only an anecdote.

 

Stopped in an area of California to have a coffee in an outside area. There was a classic car show with 50 to 100 vehicles. Cars could have come from any direction in the surrounding counties. Many people congregating closely with a very low mask use. Lucky if it was at 50%. I found it interesting to see the breath of individuals talking to each other, as it was relatively cool. Hmm California.

[Mind]

International study reveals that lockdowns have no clear benefit.

 

I suspect similar studies will be arriving soon about masks as well. Before this pandemic the CDC found masking and other hygiene measures have no effect on respiratory pandemics (based upon decades of RCT trials). The evidence is clear that masking has had little effect on the spread of COVID and retrospective studies will indicate this as well.

[Hip]

International study reveals that lockdowns have no clear benefit.

 

That's not what the study itself says at all. 

[Daniel Cooper]

That's not what the study itself says at all.

 

 
So the "more restrictive non-pharmacological interventions" mrNPI would have included mask mandates along with other restrictions (mandatory stay at home orders, business closings, etc.).  So, certainly masking is part of those mrNPIs but are not the exclusive differences. 
 
I also thought this was interesting.  They are apparently attributing South Korea's success to testing, contact tracing, and isolation.
 

[Florin]

So the "more restrictive non-pharmacological interventions" mrNPI would have included mask mandates along with other restrictions (mandatory stay at home orders, business closings, etc.).  So, certainly masking is part of those mrNPIs but are not the exclusive differences. 
 
I also thought this was interesting.  They are apparently attributing South Korea's success to testing, contact tracing, and isolation.

 

Wrong. Neither mask wearing or mask mandates are mentioned.

Edited by Florin, 04 February 2021 - 12:30 AM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Wrong. Neither mask wearing or mask mandates are mentioned.

 

Ah .... then you are aware of locations that implemented "more restrictive non-pharmacological interventions" that did not include masking.

 

Interesting.

[Florin]

Ah .... then you are aware of locations that implemented "more restrictive non-pharmacological interventions" that did not include masking.

 

Interesting.

 

The study is claiming that those interventions didn't add much compared to less restrictive interventions. It doesn't say whether or not it controlled for masking. Other studies claim the opposite, and I'm not going to debate which position is more likely to be correct.

 

What I am going to challenge is your claim that the study has anything to say or imply about masking. It doesn't.

 

All of the studies I know about have claimed that masking was one of the best interventions for this pandemic. I couldn't find even one anti-masking study. Yet, you and the anti-maskers haven't mentioned any of those.

 

Interesting.

[Mind]

I can't believe what passes for "Science" at the CDC nowadays. I have lost almost all faith in the "health bureaucracies".

 

https://www.cdc.gov/..._cid=mm7006e2_w

 

Study from March through October shows masks might be working a little bit to slow the spread. Once again, it seems they are mistaking "masks working" with seasonality.

 

After the middle of October, cases explode everywhere, even though the vast majority of people are wearing masks. More than ever.

 

 

Attached Files

•  Mask insanity.png   109.71KB   0 downloads

[Dorian Grey]

Beating my dead horse here, but every day, I'm seeing folks who think their masks are magic shields; standing 18 inches apart & chattering away with strangers in shops.  

 

Would be interesting to see a study on whether masks at close range or simply STANDING BACK while talking with strangers would be safer.  I do both, but really haven't seen anyone else practicing this.  

 

Personally, I feel masks do provide some measure of protection, but if they give you a false sense of security & you start interacting with strangers at close range because you feel protected, this may nullify any benefit.  

[Mind]

Beating my dead horse here, but every day, I'm seeing folks who think their masks are magic shields; standing 18 inches apart & chattering away with strangers in shops.  

 

Would be interesting to see a study on whether masks at close range or simply STANDING BACK while talking with strangers would be safer.  I do both, but really haven't seen anyone else practicing this.  

 

Personally, I feel masks do provide some measure of protection, but if they give you a false sense of security & you start interacting with strangers at close range because you feel protected, this may nullify any benefit.  

 

In the CDC meta study of past RCT trials during pandemics, they remark "Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks,"

 

They are saying the same thing as you, the same thing as Fauci and many other experts explained about widespread masking - before the weird religion of mask-wearing became a thing - that masks are the spherical cow of pandemic response.

 

Masks work really well in the lab (and as a side benefit, the mannequins used in the studies did not get ill).

 

They don't work really well in the general public, for the reasons you explained, for the reasons Fauci explained, and for the reasons many in this thread have explained.

Edited by Mind, 10 February 2021 - 10:42 PM.

[geo12the]

I can't believe what passes for "Science" at the CDC nowadays. I have lost almost all faith in the "health bureaucracies".

 

https://www.cdc.gov/..._cid=mm7006e2_w

 

Study from March through October shows masks might be working a little bit to slow the spread. Once again, it seems they are mistaking "masks working" with seasonality.

 

After the middle of October, cases explode everywhere, even though the vast majority of people are wearing masks. More than ever.

 

November and December when cases skyrocket coincide with Thanksgiving and Christmas when more folks had get togethers. Cases now are going down, at least here in CA. And even if there is seasonality, which I think there is, that does not exclude the possibility that masks work. 

Edited by geo12the, 11 February 2021 - 12:58 AM.

[Florin]

I can't believe what passes for "Science" at the CDC nowadays. I have lost almost all faith in the "health bureaucracies".

 

https://www.cdc.gov/..._cid=mm7006e2_w

 

Study from March through October shows masks might be working a little bit to slow the spread. Once again, it seems they are mistaking "masks working" with seasonality.

 

After the middle of October, cases explode everywhere, even though the vast majority of people are wearing masks. More than ever.

 

This has already been discussed to death. There's no seasonality in Asia, and the flu has disappeared. So, the increase in cases and deaths was probably caused mostly by the holidays and more contagious variants.

 

In the CDC meta study of past RCT trials during pandemics, they remark "Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks,"

 

They are saying the same thing as you, the same thing as Fauci and many other experts explained about widespread masking - before the weird religion of mask-wearing became a thing - that masks are the spherical cow of pandemic response.

 

Masks work really well in the lab (and as a side benefit, the mannequins used in the studies did not get ill).

 

They don't work really well in the general public, for the reasons you explained, for the reasons Fauci explained, and for the reasons many in this thread have explained.

 

As I've explained before, those RCTs are poor evidence as that meta study itself admitted.

 

While masks might not work really well now, they seemed to have worked well enough before.

 

Anyway, it's time to switch to respirators. This should have been done as soon as the manufacturing situation improved. The switch should have happened before the holidays but didn't, and as a result, the pandmeic got worse.

 

Can everyone at least agree that recommending the use of respirators instead of masks is a good idea?

[Mind]

Same as the masks not doing very much to slow the spread, all of the hand-washing and sterilizing everything is not doing much either, yet no one wants to admit it. It seems it is just pride that is getting in the way of better ideas at this point. No one wants to admit the mistakes and move forward with a better pandemic response.

 

Hygiene Theater Is Still a Huge Waste of Time - The Atlantic

 

CDC recommending 2 masks is tacit acknowledgement that the last year of mask wearing didn't work. If 1 mask worked really really well, then no need to recommend 2 masks.

 

As far as respirators goes, there would probably be some benefit, but I am not sure there would be a dramatic benefit, since most people are getting the virus at home, when they are eating or drinking, or in other close social gatherings, when they are not wearing any face protection. Common people wearing masks or respirators are not well-trained in handling, so there might be some of the same problems that are occurring with regular "face-coverings".

 

In addition, a meta study of regular masks versus N-95 masks found no difference in the spread of influenza-like-illness or respiratory illness in health care professionals. If N-95 was superior, then it should have jumped out of the data. Authors of the study say that there might have been problems with how people used the masks - which is the crux of the issue with the general public. If health care professionals cannot follow their training with PPE well enough to prevent the spread of ILI, then the general public most certainly will not.

 

Once again in the masks vs. n95 meta analysis, the authors mention how in lab tests the masks seem to block a lot of particles and should work, but in real world situations, they don't.

[Florin]

Same as the masks not doing very much to slow the spread, all of the hand-washing and sterilizing everything is not doing much either, yet no one wants to admit it. It seems it is just pride that is getting in the way of better ideas at this point. No one wants to admit the mistakes and move forward with a better pandemic response.
 
Hygiene Theater Is Still a Huge Waste of Time - The Atlantic

I mostly agree that hygiene isn't that important for this pandemic, but I don't agree that it's completely useless either. If it prevents just a few percent of cases or deaths, that's good enough. And I suspect a lot of people don't practice good hygiene anyway, and this is a good excuse to motivate them to be more hygienic and prevent the spread of other infectious diseases. Unless you're against hand washing in general, I don't see any big downside here.
 

CDC recommending 2 masks is tacit acknowledgement that the last year of mask wearing didn't work. If 1 mask worked really really well, then no need to recommend 2 masks.

This is just a response to the more contagious variants.
 

As far as respirators goes, there would probably be some benefit, but I am not sure there would be a dramatic benefit, since most people are getting the virus at home, when they are eating or drinking, or in other close social gatherings, when they are not wearing any face protection. Common people wearing masks or respirators are not well-trained in handling, so there might be some of the same problems that are occurring with regular "face-coverings".

Of course, I'm assuming that most people aren't a bunch of complete idiots. Obviously, everyone in a household would have to wear respirators whenever they're indoors outside of the household.

 

Reusable, elastomeric respirators are better (sometimes by a lot) than disposable N95s in almost every way. Elastomerics are better fitting than disposables. In fact, with elastomerics you can do a fit check yourself to ensure a proper seal; this is impossible to do for valveless disposables (I'm not sure about the disposable that come with valves though). Elastomerics can also use N100-equivalent filters which are better then the N95 standard used in health care. They're also more comfortable, so compliance should be better.

 

As for training, it's fairly simple (again, I assume most people aren't complete idiots) to do a fit check and you'll get a good fit even without doing one. Also, millions of people already have some experience with elastomerics from doing projects around the house.

 

Since you seem to think that there's at least some possibility for a dramatic benefit, wouldn't it be a good idea to try to find out if this is the case?
 

In addition, a meta study of regular masks versus N-95 masks found no difference in the spread of influenza-like-illness or respiratory illness in health care professionals. If N-95 was superior, then it should have jumped out of the data. Authors of the study say that there might have been problems with how people used the masks - which is the crux of the issue with the general public. If health care professionals cannot follow their training with PPE well enough to prevent the spread of ILI, then the general public most certainly will not.
 
Once again in the masks vs. n95 meta analysis, the authors mention how in lab tests the masks seem to block a lot of particles and should work, but in real world situations, they don't.

 

This meta analysis was actually inconclusive due to "insufficient data." Can you point out a meta that actually shows N95s don't work?

 

A more recent meta claims (with low certainty, however) that N95s work better than masks.

 

There are issues with all of these metas, however. Fit seems to be a problem but how big of a problem it actually is seems unclear. And a bigger problem is that they're looking only at disposable respirators (which are not that easy to fit) with only N95 ratings. As I've mentioned before, elastomerics are better in almost every way, including fit.

 

Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis
https://doi.org/10.1...6736(20)31142-9

 

Proper fit of face masks is more important than material, study suggests
https://www.eurekale...c-pfo021121.php

Edited by Florin, 11 February 2021 - 09:17 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

November and December when cases skyrocket coincide with Thanksgiving and Christmas when more folks had get togethers. Cases now are going down, at least here in CA. And even if there is seasonality, which I think there is, that does not exclude the possibility that masks work. 

 

If you'll look at the graphs for Europe you'll see that cases start their uptick in later September/early October. And Thanksgiving isn't really a thing there.