# To Mask or Not to Mask, that is the Question **URL:** \ **Category:** The Quarantine Zone\ **Tags:** covid-quarantine\ **Created:** [August 12, 2020, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910 "2020-08-12T18:08:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![FigNorton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fignorton/32/5619_2.png) [@FigNorton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FigNorton)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2020, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/222 "2020-11-19T17:57:45Z")
> [@Tfletch1](#): > > Canada and many European countries had pretty strict and long lockdowns in the Spring. They didn’t reopen until their case numbers were close to zero and they had very aggressive testing and contact tracing in place. Therefore, masks were not really needed. Many recently started mask mandates as their numbers started rising in the Fall. Wasn’t quite enough for them so they’ve done partial or complete shutdowns again. I’m curious where you get this from because it isn’t exactly accurate. I don’t know about all of Europe but Germany had a patchwork of mask laws at the province level during the first surge, the federal government put in a mask mandate near the beginning of their reopening, not during a rise in cases. Canada doesn’t actually have a nationwide mask law and again, the various local laws came during reopening, not as a reaction to rising cases. The nordic countries in Europe might fit your description but the ones that were enacted were pretty weak - like only mandatory on public transport. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2020, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/223 "2020-11-19T18:01:00Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > I’m interested in all the reasons mask mandates do not seem to evidently work. Why wouldn’t anyone be? Let me spell this out for you. It’s you vs. thousands of epidemiologists, infectious disease doctors, and public health experts. It’s you versus the many scientific studies and explanations that people have cited in this thread and elsewhere on the SDMB. I don’t know what your motive is in trying to argue that masks don’t work, but you have neither the credentials nor a shred of credible evidence to support your claims. If you’re trying to persuade anyone, it’s not working. ---
**Author:** ![eschrodinger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschrodinger/32/122_2.png) [@eschrodinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschrodinger)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2020, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/224 "2020-11-19T18:47:54Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > Here’s another one, if you like: Besides the points others have made, what number of White House cases are you comparing this to? Because I don’t think we really know the total number of cases from people who work at the White House. We know the secret service has had outbreaks, with, recently, 130 agents infected or quarantining. Residence staff have been infected, and at least two super spreader events have occurred, which led to at least dozens of infections. More importantly, I think you finally clarified that part of your point is that masks can’t totally stop the spread. Can you expand on what your thesis here is? Because everyone arguing against you knows that masks are not the 100% solution. But there is evidence of multiple kinds that they do help. I think you have admitted – correct me if I’m wrong – that they _can_ help, at least to some degree. So is your point only that people are overestimating how much they help? Does that lead you to conclude that people should not wear them, or should not be made to wear them? Is that it? ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2020, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/225 "2020-11-19T21:57:13Z")
> [@FigNorton](#): > > I’m curious where you get this from because it isn’t exactly accurate. I don’t know about all of Europe but Germany had a patchwork of mask laws at the province level during the first surge, the federal government put in a mask mandate near the beginning of their reopening, not during a rise in cases. Canada doesn’t actually have a nationwide mask law and again, the various local laws came during reopening, not as a reaction to rising cases. The nordic countries in Europe might fit your description but the ones that were enacted were pretty weak - like only mandatory on public transport. My post wasn’t as precise as you would like because it was a generalized response to q questions on why Europeans and Canadians didn’t have as high mask compliance as the US. I stated no specific country AND nothing I said contradicts what you just said. My point was that because of successful and more stringent lockdowns (and more careful reopening) masks were not as essential as in certain places in the US that reopened too quickly. ---
**Author:** ![Trom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/958977/32.png) [@Trom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trom)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2020, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/226 "2020-11-19T22:19:58Z")
> **[Association of Country-wide Coronavirus Mortality with Demographics, Testing,...](https://www.ajtmh.org/view/journals/tpmd/103/6/article-p2400.xml)** > > ABSTRACT We studied sources of variation between countries in per-capita mortality from COVID-19 (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus). Potential predictors of per-capita coronavirus-related mortality in 200 countries by May 9, 2020 were examined,... We studied sources of variation between countries in per-capita mortality from COVID-19 (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus). Potential predictors of per-capita coronavirus-related mortality in 200 countries by May 9, 2020 were examined, including age, gender, obesity prevalence, temperature, urbanization, smoking, duration of the outbreak, lockdowns, viral testing, contact-tracing policies, and public mask-wearing norms and policies. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed. In univariate analysis, the prevalence of smoking, per-capita gross domestic product, urbanization, and colder average country temperature was positively associated with coronavirus-related mortality. In a multivariable analysis of 196 countries, the duration of the outbreak in the country, and the proportion of the population aged 60 years or older were positively associated with per-capita mortality, whereas duration of mask-wearing by the public was negatively associated with mortality (all P \< 0.001). Obesity and less stringent international travel restrictions were independently associated with mortality in a model which controlled for testing policy. Viral testing policies and levels were not associated with mortality. Internal lockdown was associated with a nonsignificant 2.4% reduction in mortality each week (P = 0.83). The association of contact-tracing policy with mortality was not statistically significant (P = 0.06). **In countries with cultural norms or government policies supporting public mask-wearing, per-capita coronavirus mortality increased on average by just 16.2% each week, as compared with 61.9% each week in remaining countries.** Societal norms and government policies supporting the wearing of masks by the public, as well as international travel controls, are independently associated with lower per-capita mortality from COVID-19. Bolding mine. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2020, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/227 "2020-11-19T23:46:43Z")
> [@Sateryn76](#): > > Here’s a controlled study out of Denmark. Doesn’t look good for the effectiveness of masks: This study is consistent with the other studies that show that mask wearing protects others more than it protects the wearer. That’s the reason for a lot of the political angst about this issue. The policy needs to be more universal because the person wearing the mask doesn’t get the most benefit unless others around the wearer are also wearing masks. This study reinforces that finding. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/228 "2020-11-20T00:31:38Z")
Said another way, and I’m sure this is a surprise to some of our vehement objectors … A policy that is not followed is not effective. But the failure is in the non-following, not in the policy. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/229 "2020-11-20T01:07:28Z")
[https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/19/europe/coronavirus-europe-lockdown-tiers-intl/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/19/europe/coronavirus-europe-lockdown-tiers-intl/index.html) > [@](#): > > [Lockdowns](https://cnn.com/travel/article/vacation-london-during-lockdown/index.html) could be avoided if everyone followed health measures such as wearing masks, the World Health Organization’s top [Europe](https://cnn.com/2020/11/13/world/schools-covid-europe-us-lockdown-intl/index.html) official said at a Thursday news briefing. > > WHO Europe’s Regional Director Hans Kluge stressed that lockdowns should be a “last resort,” and urged the public to follow guidance to help to prevent deaths. > > He said that if 95% of people wore masks, instead of the current 60%, “lockdowns would not be needed” – although **he added that mask use was not a “panacea” and needed to be combined with other measures**. > > “If we all do our share, lockdowns are avoidable,” Kluge said. bold added Mask wearing is not a panacea. It’s a mitigation effort, along with others, that can help avoid lockdowns. Along with that, for the mask wearing to be effective enough to avoid a lockdown, there needs to be 95% compliance as versus 60% compliance. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/230 "2020-11-20T04:01:12Z")
> [@Sateryn76](#): > > Here’s a controlled study out of Denmark. Doesn’t look good for the effectiveness of masks: > > [https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/do-masks-stop-the-spread-of-covid-19-](https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/do-masks-stop-the-spread-of-covid-19-) > > [Direct link to study](https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) An article about that study. > **[We Need to Talk About That Danish 'Masks Don't Work' Study](https://lifehacker.com/we-need-to-talk-about-that-danish-masks-dont-work-study-1845716261)** > > A recent study of mask wearing in Denmark is being shared as if it proves that masks don’t protect us. That’s not what the study actually says.I’ll ge > [@](#): > > A recent study of mask wearing in Denmark is being shared as if it proves that masks don’t protect us. That’s not what the study actually says. > . . . > So if you’re sharing this study to support your previously held opinion that masks are stupid and you don’t want to wear one, please stop. Pretty much what most people in the thread have already posted. It just lays out what the study said and didn’t say in more detail. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/231 "2020-11-20T04:13:31Z")
> [@Sateryn76](#): > > Here’s a controlled study out of Denmark. Doesn’t look good for the effectiveness of masks: > > [https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/do-masks-stop-the-spread-of-covid-19-](https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/do-masks-stop-the-spread-of-covid-19-) > > [Direct link to study](https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) To add to the other comments about that study, the authors themselves admit that only 46% wore their masks correctly at all times. Also, in their own words, “Limitations: Inconclusive results, missing data, variable adherence, patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decrease disease transmission from mask wearers to others.” This study was done in April - May. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/232 "2020-11-20T04:17:51Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Pretty much what most people in the thread have already posted. It just lays out what the study said and didn’t say in more detail. The article also provides this interesting bit of information, " Did they see a _small_ reduction in risk? Impossible to say. The study was powered, [in the statistical sense](https://www.statisticsteacher.org/2017/09/15/what-is-power/), to detect a 50% reduction in infections between the mask group and the control group. If masks reduced risk by a lower amount—25%? 10%?—the study wasn’t able to detect that." ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/233 "2020-11-20T05:24:11Z")
> **[Which states have mask mandates: Map](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/states-mask-mandates-map/story?id=74168504)** > > Despite scientific evidence that widespread mask wearing slows the spread of coronavirus and benefits the economy, these states do not have statewide mask mandates. Only 13 states don’t have a statewide mask mandate. I didn’t look very carefully, so maybe I’m off base here, but I’m guessing most of the 13 states are red states. > **[Article claiming that "masks don’t work" misleads readers by inaccurately...](https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/the-blaze-article-claiming-that-masks-dont-work-misleads-readers-by-inaccurately-interpreting-a-withdrawn-study-and-a-published-study-conducted-on-u-s-marine-corps-recruits/)** > > Scientific studies recently published have demonstrated that non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as the wearing of face masks, physical distancing, and lockdowns, are effective at reducing the spread of COVID-19. These measures have been an... Another ‘masks don’t work’ article debunked. ---
**Author:** ![FigNorton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fignorton/32/5619_2.png) [@FigNorton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FigNorton)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/234 "2020-11-20T05:25:00Z")
> [@Tfletch1](#): > > To add to the other comments about that study, the authors themselves admit that only 46% wore their masks correctly at all times I think I should point out that most of the “objections” to that study noted here are not based on reading the link provided. The study ended up with about 5000 participants, intended to study mask usefulness for the wearer and of course actually followed along with participants as to whether they were complying. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/235 "2020-11-20T05:33:58Z")
> [@FigNorton](#): > > I think I should point out that most of the “objections” to that study noted here are not based on reading the link provided. The study ended up with about 5000 participants, intended to study mask usefulness for the wearer and of course actually followed along with participants as to whether they were complying… The point **Tfletch1** made and that you’re quoting was in the [study in the link provided](https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817) as quoted here: > [@](#): > > Based on the lowest adherence reported in the mask group during follow-up, 46% of participants wore the mask as recommended, 47% predominantly as recommended, and 7% not as recommended. ---
**Author:** ![FigNorton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fignorton/32/5619_2.png) [@FigNorton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FigNorton)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/236 "2020-11-20T05:39:48Z")
I know. What do you think leaving out the “47% predominantly as recommended” says about his argument style? What do you think of the JAQing style of “if it was a big enough study” and “they … seemed to not follow up with participants”\* \*paraphrased ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/237 "2020-11-20T15:48:53Z")
The study found a reduction in risk to the wearer that was not statistically significantly. The solution to “not statistically significant” is often a larger study. The study didn’t even look for reduction in risk to others, which is where masks are believed to be most effective. Yes, I only read the conclusions and the design of the study, I did not read the entire paper. So they did follow up, despite not mentioning that in the design. Cool. And apparently they found adherence to wearing masks properly was low in the “wear masks” group. ---
**Author:** ![FigNorton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fignorton/32/5619_2.png) [@FigNorton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FigNorton)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/238 "2020-11-20T15:50:38Z")
This study had 5000 people and was conducted during the early days when mask use wasn’t being recommended for the general public at all. Eta: so no, it doesn’t take away from the current reasoning behind mask use but some people were/are hopeful that mask use lowers your exposure. ---
**Author:** ![tofor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tofor/32/13727_2.png) [@tofor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tofor)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/239 "2020-11-20T15:52:55Z")
> [@puzzlegal](#): > > The study didn’t even look for reduction in risk to others, which is where masks are believed to be most effective. I imagine this would be a very hard study to do. “Ok, you 3000 people spend a bunch of time around sick people wearing masks in your day-to-day lives. You other 3000 people, spend all your time around people not wearing masks.” Oh, you want double blind? “Ok, we’re giving 3000 people masks to hand out to all the people around them, and the other 3000 people fake masks that look just like the real thing, and all the people they interact with need to wear them.” ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/240 "2020-11-20T15:55:32Z")
> [@tofor](#): > > I imagine this would be a very hard study to do. Yes, that’s why all the data to date is animal data, physical models, and observational studies. All of which are “science”, even if they aren’t double-blinded prospective studies. ---
**Author:** ![susan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/susan/32/17537_2.png) [@susan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/susan)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2020, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910/241 "2020-11-20T15:57:37Z")
You could compare different types of masks that were manufactured to have the same appearance. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-mask-or-not-to-mask-that-is-the-question/917910.md?page=13)