GNU social JP
  • FAQ
  • Login
GNU social JPは日本のGNU socialサーバーです。
Usage/ToS/admin/test/Pleroma FE

  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Featured
    • Popular
    • People

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice

  1. Embed this notice
    KeepTakingTheSoma (keeptakingthesoma@spinster.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 19-Aug-2025 02:17:46 JSTKeepTakingTheSomaKeepTakingTheSoma
    in reply to
    • lainy
    • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
    • :gnu:+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
    • EvolLove
    @taylan @lain @EvolLove @bonifartius I'm afraid not.

    "limited evidence"
    https://www.cfp.ca/content/66/7/509

    "no significant effect"
    https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

    "unlikely to be protective"
    https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

    "failed to provide definitive evidence"
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240287

    They also cause damage to our health and the planet:

    https://off-guardian.org/2020/11/06/face-masks-a-danger-to-our-planet-our-children-ourselves/

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-56972074

    https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2022/august/pandemic-face-masks-could-harm-wildlife-for-years-to-come.html

    I never confronted anyone who wore one, nor did I ever see anyone else do that. I was confronted by mask wearers and also saw this happen to other people. Wearing a mask was a choice and I believe that adults should be able to choose for themselves.
    The initial response was that they do not work, but this very quickly pivoted to compulsory behaviour. I believe that mask wearing was chosen as an easily identifiable marker of compliance.
    My views do not excuse the behaviour of the man in the news article you kindly sent to me and I totally condemn his actions and hope he is in prison for murder.

    The picture is from a box of such masks.
    In conversationabout 5 months ago from spinster.xyzpermalink

    Attachments

    1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: wwwnc.cdc.gov
      Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures
      Pandemic Influenza—Personal Protective Measures

    2. https://media.spinster.xyz/7540d3762fcd559cc21ce51be437f78d2712e9484f4712c225abf8b5c7fca316.jpg
    3. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.cfp.ca
      Masks for prevention of viral respiratory infections among health care workers and the public
      Objective To determine the effect of mask use on viral respiratory infection risk. Data sources MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Study selection Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in at least 1 published systematic review comparing the use of masks with a control group, either in community or health care settings, on the risk of viral respiratory infections. Synthesis In total, 11 systematic reviews were included and 18 RCTs of 26 444 participants were found, 12 in the community and 6 in health care workers. Included studies had limitations and were deemed at high risk of bias. Overall, the use of masks in the community did not reduce the risk of influenza, confirmed viral respiratory infection, influenzalike illness, or any clinical respiratory infection. However, in the 2 trials that most closely aligned with mask use in real-life community settings, there was a significant risk reduction in influenzalike illness (risk ratio [RR] = 0.83; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.99). The use of masks in households with a sick contact was not associated with a significant infection risk reduction in any analysis, no matter if masks were used by the sick individual, the healthy family members, or both. In health care workers, surgical masks were superior to cloth masks for preventing influenzalike illness (RR = 0.12; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98), and N95 masks were likely superior to surgical masks for preventing influenzalike illness (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.00) and any clinical respiratory infections (RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00). Conclusion This systematic review found limited evidence that the use of masks might reduce the risk of viral respiratory infections. In the community setting, a possible reduced risk of influenzalike illness was found among mask users. In health care workers, the results show no difference between N95 masks and surgical masks on the risk of confirmed influenza or other confirmed viral respiratory infections, although possible benefits from N95 masks were found for preventing influenzalike illness or other clinical respiratory infections. Surgical masks might be superior to cloth masks but data are limited to 1 trial.
    4. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: swprs.org
      Are Face Masks Effective? The Evidence.
      from Swiss Policy Research
      An overview of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of face masks.
    5. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: storage.googleapis.com
      Facemask against viral respiratory infections among Hajj pilgrims: A challenging cluster-randomized trial
      Background In this large-scale cluster-randomized controlled trial (cRCT) we sought to assess the effectiveness of facemasks against viral respiratory infections. Methods and results Over three consecutive Hajj seasons (2013, 2014, 2015) pilgrims’ tents in Makkah were allocated to ‘facemask’ or ‘no facemask’ group. Fifty facemasks were offered to participants in intervention tents, to be worn over four days, and none were offered to participants in control tents. All participants recorded facemask use and respiratory symptoms in health diaries. Nasal swabs were collected from the symptomatic for virus detection by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Clinical symptoms and laboratory results were analyzed by ‘intention- to-treat’ and ‘per-protocol’. A total of 7687 adult participants from 318 tents were randomized: 3864 from 149 tents to the intervention group, and 3823 from 169 tents to the control group. Participants were aged 18 to 95 (median 34, mean 37) years, with a male to female ratio of 1:1.2. Overall, respiratory viruses were detected in 277 of 650 (43%) nasal/pharyngeal swabs collected from symptomatic pilgrims. Common viruses were rhinovirus (35.1%), influenza (4.5%) and parainfluenza (1.7%). In the intervention arm, respectively 954 (24.7%) and 1842 (47.7%) participants used facemasks daily and intermittently, while in the control arm, respectively 546 (14.3%) and 1334 (34.9%) used facemasks daily and intermittently. By intention-to-treat analysis, facemask use did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 2.1, p = 0.18) nor against clinical respiratory infection (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4, p = 0.40). Similarly, in a per-protocol analysis, facemask use did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9–1.7, p = 0.26) nor against clinical respiratory infection (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0–1.8, p = 0.06). Conclusion This trial was unable to provide conclusive evidence on facemask efficacy against viral respiratory infections most likely due to poor adherence to protocol.
    6. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: off-guardian.org
      Face Masks: A Danger to Our Planet, Our Children & Ourselves
      from Editor
      Cory Morningstar It seems like only yesterday that a massive campaign against single-use plastic straws was trending. The much forgotten anti-straw trend was based on astronomical numbers; a sugges…
    7. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: ichef.bbci.co.uk
      Covid: Disposable masks pose pollutants risk, study finds
      Throw-away Covid face coverings could be polluting the environment with heavy metals and plastic.
    8. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.nhm.ac.uk
      Pandemic face masks could harm wildlife for years to come | Natural History Museum
      The protective equipment that kept us safe from COVID-19 could pose a lethal threat to nature.
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.