The Swamp logo

The Science Behind Face Masks!

by Mamas Voice 6 months ago in opinion

What side are you on?

people are being bullied and the division has quickly become an issue! Pro-mask folk can be flat out mean!

Two statements I’m hearing and seeing a lot of are;

1) “Don’t be ignorant, do your research!” And

2) “We know they’re effective because it’s why they wear them in hospitals!”

By National Cancer Institute on Unsplash

Just because something’s always been done, doesn’t mean it’s credible.

So, here you go guys, here’s the research!

If you’d rather not spend the time ciphering through it all, the verdict is in and masks are out!

By Andisheh A on Unsplash

According to actual science, there have been multiple studies on just how counter intuitive they actually are!

Neil Orr’s study –

published in 1981 – Their conclusion: “It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all” and that wearing a mask during surgery “is a standard procedure that could be abandoned.”

I know what you’re thinking! This is an old, “out-dated” study and newer studies must show the utility of masks in preventing the spread of disease, right?

A look at the medical literature for the past forty-five years has been consistent: masks are useless in preventing the spread of disease and, if anything, are unsanitary objects that themselves spread bacteria and viruses.

Ritter et al. –

In 1975, found that “the wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room environmental contamination.”

Ha’eri and Wiley –

In 1980, applied human albumin microspheres to the interior of surgical masks in 20 operations. At the end of each operation, wound washings were examined under the microscope. “Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all experiments.”

Laslett and Sabin

In 1989, found that caps and masks were not necessary during cardiac catheterization. “No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used,” they wrote. Sjøl and Kelbaek came to the same conclusion in 2002.

In Tunevall’s 1991 study –

A general surgical team wore no masks in half of their surgeries for two years. After 1,537 operations performed with masks, the wound infection rate was 4.7%. After 1,551 operations performed without masks, the wound infection rate was only 3.5%.

A review by Skinner and Sutton in 2001 –

concluded that “The evidence for discontinuing the use of surgical face masks would appear to be stronger than the evidence available to support their continued use.”

Lahme et al., in 2001 –

Wrote that “surgical face masks worn by patients during regional anaesthesia, did not reduce the concentration of airborne bacteria over the operation field in our study. Thus they are dispensable.”

Figueiredo et al., in 2001 –

Reported that in five years of doing peritoneal dialysis without masks, rates of peritonitis in their unit were no different than rates in hospitals where masks were worn.

Bahli did a systematic literature review in 2009 –

And found that “no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative wound infection was observed between masks groups and groups operated with no masks.”

Surgeons at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, recognizing the lack of evidence supporting the use of masks, ceased requiring them in 2010 for anesthesiologists and other non-scrubbed personnel in the operating room. “Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for surgery is a departure from common practice. But the evidence to support this practice does not exist,” wrote Dr. Eva Sellden.

Webster et al. –

In 2010, reported on obstetric, gynecological, general, orthopaedic, breast and urological surgeries performed on 827 patients. All non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries, and none of the non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries. Surgical site infections occurred in 11.5% of the Mask group, and in only 9.0% of the No Mask group.

Lipp and Edwards reviewed the surgical literature in 2014 –

And found “no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials.” Vincent and Edwards updated this review in 2016 and the conclusion was the same.

Carøe, in a 2014 review –

Based on four studies and 6,006 patients, wrote that “none of the four studies found a difference in the number of post-operative infections whether you used a surgical mask or not.”

Salassa and Swiontkowski, in 2014 –

investigated the necessity of scrubs, masks and head coverings in the operating room and concluded that “there is no evidence that these measures reduce the prevalence of surgical site infection.”

Da Zhou et al. –

Reviewing the literature in 2015, concluded that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that face-masks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”

By Bill Oxford on Unsplash

There you have it folks!

Mandating masks has not kept death rates down anywhere!

At the time of writing this (Aug 15, 2020) - the 20 U.S. states that have never ordered people to wear face masks indoors and out, have dramatically lower COVID-19 death rates than the 30 states that have mandated masks.

Most of the no-mask states have COVID-19 death rates below 20 per 100,000 population, and none have a death rate higher than 55. All 13 states that have death rates higher than 55 are states that have required the wearing of masks in all public places. It has not protected them.

Thank you for doing your research!


Thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed this article, please consider leaving a tip and don't forget to share it!

Until next time,

- DW

Mamas Voice
Mamas Voice
Read next: New Mexico—It's like a State, like All the Others!
Mamas Voice

From BC, Canada, a mother of 4, homeschooler and wife! Trying to navigate through a poisoned culture, keeping God in mind and heart. 💛

Thanks for reading!

See all posts by Mamas Voice

Find us on socal media

Miscellaneous links