3 ms·
> Masks were known not to help with respiratory viruses (Flu, CoV, etc.) The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 1 - emphasis mine: Physical interventions to interru
by cygx 6y ago
> Masks were known not to help with respiratory viruses (Flu, CoV, etc.)
The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 1 - emphasis mine:
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses
Although respiratory viruses usually only cause minor disease, they can cause epidemics. Approximately 10% to 15% of people worldwide contract influenza annually, with attack rates as high as 50% during major epidemics. Global pandemic viral infections have been devastating because of their wide spread. In 2003 the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic affected ~8000 people, killed 780, and caused an enormous social and economic crisis. In 2006 a new avian H5N1, and in 2009 a new H1N1 ’swine’ influenza pandemic threat, caused anxiety. Single measures (particularly the use of vaccines or antiviral drugs) may be insufficient to interruptthe spread. Therefore, we searched for evidence for the effectiveness of physical barriers (such as handwashing or wearing masks) in reducing the spread of respiratory viruses, including influenza viruses.
We found 60 studies including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with a mixed risk of bias.
Respiratory virus spread can be reduced by hygienic measures (such as handwashing), especially around younger children. Frequent handwashing can also reduce transmission from children to other household members. Implementing barriers to transmission, such as isolation, and hygienic measures (wearing masks, gloves and gowns) can be effective in containing respiratory virus epidemics or in hospital wards. The more expensive, irritating and uncomfortable N95 respirators might be superior to simple masks. It is unclear if adding virucidals or antiseptics to normal handwashing with soap is more effective. There is insufficient evidence to support screening at entry ports and social distancing as a method to reduce spread during epidemics.
- BrendanEich 6y agoShorter form: N95s might be better and "barriers to transmission and hygienic measures (wearing masks, gloves and gowns) can be effective". This is mush. The RCT papers on hospital mask users I've read either count only N95s, or confound them as the main mask type by including polypropylene masks too. The statistically significant results support N95s when fitted well. Mask mandates for civilians are polyprop or even cloth. Not N95s, which are infeasible for general population members. WHO and CDC did not recommend masks for general populations in past respiratory virus outbreaks/pandemics. Are we done yet?
- cygx 6y agoFor reference, the paper I cited is available online [1], but it's different from the version I used. In particular, the section I quoted from now reads "We found no evidence that the more expensive, irritating and uncomfortable N95 respirators were superior to simple surgical masks". A citation of interest might be [2]. > Are we done yet? I probably am, but feel free to comment if you think there's still something of value to add. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6993921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6993921/ [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19797474/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19797474/
- BrendanEich 6y agoI've read other studies that show N95s as superior, which you'd expect. They are fitted, they use an extra polyprop layer. But we can stop here, because this finding (like the many I read for N95 superiority among HCWs) did not cause WHO or CDC to advise mask mandates for all. That was novel last spring, and WHO later backed off for children.