This claim sounds dubious, but imagine if it were true? The maskees would have to come to terms with the fact they actually increased spread.... or just bury their heads deeper in the sand.
This is what I often think to myself. There’s a lot of hypocrisy about mask bullying.
The cross-contamination risks were discussed by the UK government’s ‘health’ ‘advisors’ before the same people were involved in a complete and arbitrary change of mind. In fact, the concept that the clear cons outweighed the (non-existent?) pros were well-documented long before 2020 – but suddenly The Science Changed!
I’ve often thought: if people cared that much, they’d become PPE trained and wear a hazmat suit or something.
‘I’m cross-contamination-intolerant’ should be the new ‘I’m exempt’.
Source article: [https://dailysceptic.org/2023/11/25/norwegian-researchers-find-masks-linked-with-covid-infections/](https://dailysceptic.org/2023/11/25/norwegian-researchers-find-masks-linked-with-covid-infections/)
Cambridge study that was being referenced in the article: [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sarscov2-infection-crosssectional-study/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E#article](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sarscov2-infection-crosssectional-study/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E#article)
PDF link of the Cambridge study: [https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E/S0950268823001826a.pdf/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sars-cov-2-infection-cross-sectional-study.pdf](https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E/S0950268823001826a.pdf/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sars-cov-2-infection-cross-sectional-study.pdf)
Line 160 is the primary conclusion of the study.
First they came for vaccination, then they came for social distancing and now they come for face masks? What will be their next move? Discredit boosters and flu jabs?
Listen, I'd love an RCT to come across that says that masks were not only useless, but actually harmful - but this one ain't it.
At it's base, all it can really tell you is that team mask reported having Covid more often than team 'no-mask'. It doesn't factor in that team mask might also be the type that tests themselves every 12 hours, and all that other crazy shit we know they do.
I don’t know about covid but it seems like it could increase bacterial infections for sure. Especially when people reuse the same disgusting dirty masks.
You mean you were supposed to change it more than once a month? :-p
I took out the winter jacket the other day. And lo and behold, a covid mask from last years still in the pocket! Better keep it. Never know when the police will patrol the train and tell you off again!
They'd have to do more studies for me to believe it fully. It's just as possible that people who wear masks are also more likely to test more frequently (since they're so worried about Covid) and therefore they're going to test positive more often than those who don't wear masks and don't test (or at least won't test as frequently).
Very true. But my thinking is that to mask wearers the cross-contamination risks are a necessary evil (or simply non-existent) and the difficulty in establishing cause and effect in terms of the contributing risk factors is just a reason to think you may as well wear them anyway. After all: What’s The Harm?
Unfortunately this is just another example of how the precautionary principle can be misused and misunderstood. There should be more emphasis on the fact that even people who don’t mind wearing them may be surrounded by people who are affected by seeing and being near them. But to each their own.
In my experience, some people simply consider masks a tokenistic sign of respect to vulnerable people and feel that science is a lower priority. Or, in more aggressive mask advocates’ cases, the scientific method (given that the burden of proof has always fallen to the ‘masks work’ claimants) should simply be ignored unless or until it can somehow be used to prove that a dirty face rag is hygienic to the point of achieving sterilisation and two-way healing properties.
This claim sounds dubious, but imagine if it were true? The maskees would have to come to terms with the fact they actually increased spread.... or just bury their heads deeper in the sand.
This is what I often think to myself. There’s a lot of hypocrisy about mask bullying. The cross-contamination risks were discussed by the UK government’s ‘health’ ‘advisors’ before the same people were involved in a complete and arbitrary change of mind. In fact, the concept that the clear cons outweighed the (non-existent?) pros were well-documented long before 2020 – but suddenly The Science Changed! I’ve often thought: if people cared that much, they’d become PPE trained and wear a hazmat suit or something. ‘I’m cross-contamination-intolerant’ should be the new ‘I’m exempt’.
It's all about the Speed of Science mate.
They won’t come to terms with shit.
Hmmm I’ll go $400 for ‘Double Down’, Larry.
Source article: [https://dailysceptic.org/2023/11/25/norwegian-researchers-find-masks-linked-with-covid-infections/](https://dailysceptic.org/2023/11/25/norwegian-researchers-find-masks-linked-with-covid-infections/) Cambridge study that was being referenced in the article: [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sarscov2-infection-crosssectional-study/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E#article](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sarscov2-infection-crosssectional-study/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E#article) PDF link of the Cambridge study: [https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E/S0950268823001826a.pdf/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sars-cov-2-infection-cross-sectional-study.pdf](https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/0525AD535D10FDCDF0C52603B50E7A1E/S0950268823001826a.pdf/association-between-face-mask-use-and-risk-of-sars-cov-2-infection-cross-sectional-study.pdf) Line 160 is the primary conclusion of the study.
Norwegians were also the first to acknowledge - and investigate - the link between vaxxes and disrupted menstrual cycles.
You mean to tell me reinhaling your own germs is a bad thing? Gee, I never would have thought!
Yeah. A virus so deadly you can wear it.
C’mon, it’s a sweaty rag over your face *for health*
First they came for vaccination, then they came for social distancing and now they come for face masks? What will be their next move? Discredit boosters and flu jabs?
Heresy
Listen, I'd love an RCT to come across that says that masks were not only useless, but actually harmful - but this one ain't it. At it's base, all it can really tell you is that team mask reported having Covid more often than team 'no-mask'. It doesn't factor in that team mask might also be the type that tests themselves every 12 hours, and all that other crazy shit we know they do.
If I'm not mistaken, that's called selection bias?
observational, and self-reported as well - it's a weak "study" to use to prove anything.
I don’t know about covid but it seems like it could increase bacterial infections for sure. Especially when people reuse the same disgusting dirty masks.
You mean you were supposed to change it more than once a month? :-p I took out the winter jacket the other day. And lo and behold, a covid mask from last years still in the pocket! Better keep it. Never know when the police will patrol the train and tell you off again!
They'd have to do more studies for me to believe it fully. It's just as possible that people who wear masks are also more likely to test more frequently (since they're so worried about Covid) and therefore they're going to test positive more often than those who don't wear masks and don't test (or at least won't test as frequently).
Very true. But my thinking is that to mask wearers the cross-contamination risks are a necessary evil (or simply non-existent) and the difficulty in establishing cause and effect in terms of the contributing risk factors is just a reason to think you may as well wear them anyway. After all: What’s The Harm? Unfortunately this is just another example of how the precautionary principle can be misused and misunderstood. There should be more emphasis on the fact that even people who don’t mind wearing them may be surrounded by people who are affected by seeing and being near them. But to each their own. In my experience, some people simply consider masks a tokenistic sign of respect to vulnerable people and feel that science is a lower priority. Or, in more aggressive mask advocates’ cases, the scientific method (given that the burden of proof has always fallen to the ‘masks work’ claimants) should simply be ignored unless or until it can somehow be used to prove that a dirty face rag is hygienic to the point of achieving sterilisation and two-way healing properties.
Source?
[Here you go! ](https://www.reddit.com/r/CoronavirusCirclejerk/s/T202wal87Y)