In a Gem State Patriot article that I wrote early in the pandemic, I argued that the only mask that worked against viruses with the physical and chemical characteristics of Covid-19 was the N-95 mask properly fitted.
I believe at this stage in the Covid crises that I have been proven correct. Many of the scientists, clinicians and public health specialists that signed onto the Great Barrington Declaration have also been shown to have been correct—despite the personal attacks that were made against them for their “scientific opinions”. Remember the calls about “settled science”? In 2015 the World Health Organization made the exact same argument about the efficacy of masks in combating airborne viruses.
In my article that was written in the early part of the pandemic, I cited articles in the nursing, medical, public health journals, and in OSHA directives and engineering journals. A properly fitting N-95 mask was efficacious for the elderly and those with comorbidities. For the healthy and young it was irrelevant—to use a non “scientific” term. We discussed issues surrounding “thread counts” in cotton and cellulose (paper) masks. WE talked about the differences between droplets and aerosolized transmission. We talked about how masks were fitted, length of time the were worn and many other things. Most of all we talked about the fact that if one should or should not wear a mask should be up to them—not mandated by a government agency. Businesses should have decided what was best for their customers and employees, not made decisions based on complying to an “emergency order” that would allow for unique coding and billing for services. We most of all recommended talking to your doctor and listening to their advice instead of deciding based on the opinion of “experts” in the government or media.
On Feb. 22nd, 2023, a “meta-analysis” was published by UK based Cochran group that publishes metanalysis reviews and coalesces medical articles. I do not take much head in “metanalysis”, but a VOX review of their findings is provided below:
A YouTube Video that I used for the title of this article was produced by the McCaffrey Medical Group in the mid-pandemic.
What was presented in that video by a practicing physician is more in line with the Cochran analysis than what was recommended to us by “THE EXPERTS” during the pandemic. For a single technical reason in the meta-analysis—the inability to break out sub-groups that have already been coalesced— like a vulnerable group or a young and healthy group I only agree with about 90% of the presentation: https://fb.watch/jcTn-jND8M/
I will let the article and presentation speak for themselves. Science is never ever “settled”.
