Dr. Anthony Fauci has been the biggest cheerleader for masks and their associated mandates over the past three years. In the face of scientific evidence and research suggesting that masks were ineffective when worn by the general population, Fauci initially dismissed their usefulness. However, without any new randomized controlled trials or evidence to justify his change of opinion, Fauci suddenly flip-flopped, promoting masks as a necessary tool to prevent the spread of COVID.
Fauci claimed that masks were meant for source control and then later argued that they protected the wearer as well. Despite providing low-quality evidence, Fauci continued to support his recommendation that the public should wear two masks. He defended indefinite mandates and forcing children to wear masks, despite lacking evidence to support his assertions.
Just recently, Fauci said he regrets not having pushed mask mandates earlier, despite the lack of evidence that they worked. But in the same NY Times interview, he admitted that masks don’t make a dent in the fight against Covid.
“From a broad public-health standpoint, at the population level, masks work at the margins — maybe 10 percent,” Fauci said.
So, he should have pushed mandates earlier, but masks also don’t work? For the record, there’s actually no evidence that masks are even 10% effective, but even assuming it is that high, it certainly doesn’t outweigh the negative effects of such mandates.
“But for an individual who religiously wears a mask, a well-fitted KN95 or N95, it’s not at the margin. It really does work,” Fauci added.
Again, there is no evidence of this statement being true. And Fauci himself wore a regular cloth mask and told people it doesn’t make a difference which mask they wear. Now only KN95 or N95 masks work?
Fauci won’t wind up in jail for the horrors he caused whose effects will be felt for decades, but there will be Judgement waiting for him Up There.
(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
30 Responses
I agree wholeheartedly
Yes. Anyone with a half a brain, knew all along the flimsy disposable masks was all for theater. Oh, they were only following the science. Aha. All the lemechels who are still, till today, wearing those stupid disposable masks, have the chutzpa to call us rodfim and rotzchim. Same dummies who put those plastic partitions by the bima. Brainless robotic obedient sheeple.
If I remember correctly, he had trouble with masks if they work or not all the way in the beginning. First he said masks don’t work and then he said that they work tremendously and everyone should be masking up.
Bold face liar or he just learned new facts and changed his view?
The “horror” of having to wear a mask.
Is that a joke?
Is it 10% of the time, or 9.5% or 8.0%? He is, after all, Dr. Science. We deserve to get precise figures from him.
The author of this article does not seem to know what he is talking about. Firstly, public health officials are allowed to be wrong and make mistakes in the beginning of a major pandemic. The sentence “without any new randomized controlled trials…” is laughable. No one does randomized control trials on major complex factors like making. You do trials to test a specific drug or therapeutic, not a general public health response. For those, the science looks at broad data sets and models. Sort of like the difference between physics and chemistry lab studoes as opposed to sociological or economics studies. They are both scientific but use different tools. There was research that suggested that masking worked if the variable of masking was able to be isolated in a data set of different locations and their covid data. This could change based on new variants, factors, and other effects. There’s a reason that surgeons, doctors, and even dentists where masks when they operate. This anti Fauci rhetoric is really crazy. Please state some some of evidence if you disagree with a major public health authority who is far more aware of the research than you are. Does the author of this article know how to understand the contents of one medical study, let alone the abstract or a public journalist’s possibly erroneous read?
Aerosol Science and Technology Volume 56, 2022 – Issue 2
Research Article
Variability of the penetration of particles through facemasks
Buddhi Pushpawela
Stavros Amanatidis
Yuanlong Huang
&
Richard C. Flagan
Abstract
COVID-19 is transmitted, at least in part, by airborne particles emitted by infected individuals. Wearing masks is one of the key actions that are required to prevent spreading COVID-19. To understand the variability in the performance, we evaluated the material performance of the whole mask, as manufactured, in terms of the penetration of particles, comfort and the quality factor of multiple copies of 29 different types. All masks were mounted to prevent leakage around the edges so the mask material and manufacture was tested, but the effects of the fit were not considered. The results of this study thus represent the upper bound of the performance of facemasks since leakage around the edges due to poor fit often overwhelms filtration through the mask material. The tests were performed at a steady flow rate of 30 L/min; mean values of the performance parameters were calculated for two different sizes; 0.12 µm and 0.3 µm. Of the masks tested, for 0.12 µm particles, N95 face filtering respirators consistently had the lowest peak penetration 1.7 ± 0.5%, while KN95 masks allowed 3.7 ± 2.6% penetration. In contrast, penetration through pleated procedure masks was 14.7 ± 16.9% due to one outlier – with that outlier removed, penetration decreased to 7.1 ± 4.3%; cloth masks allowed 26.4 ± 9.3% penetration. Tests on multiple copies of different masks demonstrated consistent performance of N95s, but considerably greater variability within the other classes of masks tested, leading to uncertainty in the degree of protection that they would provide”.
Copyright © 2021 American Association for Aerosol Research
This is an article from Science, a top scientific journal.
Persuading people to mask
Even in places where it is obligatory, people tend to optimistically overstate their compliance for mask wearing. How then can we persuade more of the population at large to act for the greater good? Abaluck et al. undertook a large, cluster-randomized trial in Bangladesh involving hundreds of thousands of people (although mostly men) over a 2-month period. Colored masks of various construction were handed out free of charge, accompanied by a range of mask-wearing promotional activities inspired by marketing research. Using a grassroots network of volunteers to help conduct the study and gather data, the authors discovered that mask wearing averaged 13.3% in villages where no interventions took place but increased to 42.3% in villages where in-person interventions were introduced. Villages where in-person reinforcement of mask wearing occurred also showed a reduction in reporting COVID-like illness, particularly in high-risk individuals. —CA
Structured AbstractINTRODUCTION
Mask usage remains low across many parts of the world during the COVID-19 pandemic, and strategies to increase mask-wearing remain untested. Our objectives were to identify strategies that can persistently increase mask-wearing and assess the impact of increasing mask-wearing on symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections.
RATIONALE
We conducted a cluster-randomized trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh from November 2020 to April 2021 (N = 600 villages, N = 342,183 adults). We cross-randomized mask promotion strategies at the village and household level, including cloth versus surgical masks. All intervention arms received free masks, information on the importance of masking, role modeling by community leaders, and in-person reminders for 8 weeks. The control group did not receive any interventions. Participants and surveillance staff were not informed of treatment assignments, but project materials were clearly visible. Outcomes included symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence (primary) and prevalence of proper mask-wearing, physical distancing, social distancing, and symptoms consistent with COVID-19 illness (secondary). Mask-wearing and distancing were assessed through direct observation at least weekly at mosques, markets, the main entrance roads to villages, and tea stalls. Individuals were coded as physically distanced if they were at least one arm’s length from the nearest adult; social distancing was measured using the total number of adults observed in public areas. At 5- and 9-week follow-ups, we surveyed all reachable participants about COVID-19–related symptoms. Blood samples collected at 10- to 12-week follow-ups for symptomatic individuals were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies.
RESULTS
There were 178,322 individuals in the intervention group and 163,861 individuals in the control group. The intervention increased proper mask-wearing from 13.3% in control villages (N = 806,547 observations) to 42.3% in treatment villages (N = 797,715 observations) (adjusted percentage point difference = 0.29; 95% confidence interval = [0.26, 0.31]). This tripling of mask usage was sustained during the intervention period and for 2 weeks after. Physical distancing increased from 24.1% in control villages to 29.2% in treatment villages (adjusted percentage point difference = 0.05 [0.04, 0.06]). We saw no change in social distancing. After 5 months, the impact of the intervention on mask-wearing waned, but mask-wearing remained 10 percentage points higher in the intervention group. Beyond the core intervention of free distribution and promotion at households, mosques, and markets; leader endorsements; and periodic monitoring and reminders, several elements had no additional effect on mask-wearing, including text reminders, public signage commitments, monetary or nonmonetary incentives, and altruistic messaging or verbal commitments.
The proportion of individuals with COVID-19–like symptoms was 7.63% (N = 12,784) in the intervention arm and 8.60% (N = 13,287) in the control arm, an estimated 11.6% reduction after controlling for baseline covariates. Blood samples were collected from consenting, symptomatic adults (N = 10,790). Adjusting for baseline covariates, the intervention reduced symptomatic seroprevalence by 9.5% (adjusted prevalence ratio = 0.91 [0.82, 1.00]; control prevalence = 0.76%; treatment prevalence = 0.68%). We find that surgical masks are particularly effective in reducing symptomatic seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2. In villages randomized to surgical masks (N = 200), the relative reduction was 11.1% overall (adjusted prevalence ratio = 0.89 [0.78, 1.00]). The effect of the intervention is most concentrated among the elderly population; in surgical mask villages, we observe a 35.3% reduction in symptomatic seroprevalence among individuals ≥60 years old (adjusted prevalence ratio = 0.65 [0.45, 0.85]). We see larger reductions in symptoms and symptomatic seropositivity in villages that experienced larger increases in mask use. No adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSION
A randomized-trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh during the COVID-19 pandemic shows that the intervention increased mask usage and reduced symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, demonstrating that promoting community mask-wearing can improve public health.
Childish & badly edited. Stick to copy and pasting AP press feed.
In short,
“A randomized-trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh during the COVID-19 pandemic shows that the intervention increased mask usage and reduced symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, demonstrating that promoting community mask-wearing can improve public health”.
I just got that from googling for a second. Why couldn’t you do that before saying “However, without any new randomized controlled trials or evidence to justify his change of opinion.”
Come on YWN please don’t use extreme language like “the horrors he caused whose effects will be felt for decades, but there will be Judgement waiting for him Up There.”
His advice caused horrors?!
This is disgusting!!
Come on YWN please don’t use extreme language like “the horrors he caused whose effects will be felt for decades, but there will be Judgement waiting for him Up There.”
His advice caused horrors?!
This is disgusting!!!
In almost every developed country in the world, they recommend (or required) masks. Israel had masks and lockdowns and had one of the best covid rates in the world. Bibi really did well in responding to covid. But then frum yidden get sucked into the partisan American politics and fall for all of the misinformation and conspiracy theories. This is really sad. You should see how on Telegram there are channels about how the Jews caused covid and how the head of the CDC and Pfizer are Jewish. We shouldn’t go along with these conspiracy theories.
I don’t understand, ten percent of over a hundred million REPORTED cases of covid is still TEN MILLION CASES. Does the author not understand basic mathematics?!
By the way, this is possibly the source for his 10 percent number.
“The proportion of individuals with COVID-19–like symptoms was 7.63% (N = 12,784) in the intervention arm and 8.60% (N = 13,287) in the control arm, an estimated 11.6% reduction after controlling for baseline covariates. Blood samples were collected from consenting, symptomatic adults (N = 10,790)”
“Fauci won’t wind up in jail for the horrors he caused whose effects will be felt for decades, but there will be Judgement waiting for him Up There.”
This is ridiculous. Israel awarded Fauci a prize for the amazing work that he did. He saved thousands of lives. Why don’t you report on Florida’s Surgeon General who EDITED A REPORT BASED ON NO EVIDENCE in order to fit with Desantis’ politics.
there’s no end to you vilifying anyone who contradicts trump.
for shame !
Many people died because they did not protect themselves.
If memory serves right, your newspaper was all gung-ho for all the mandates, and pretty vicious about those who didn’t go along with it. Can you admit that you made a mistake and go back and find the source of that mistake?
YWN – kindly report news only. When you append your biased opinons in bold to the beginning of article headlines, you come across as a cheap sensationalist rag.
And at least get your English correct – it’s “bald faced liar”, not “bold faced liar”.
Fauci is saying that, practically speaking, a community-wide wearing of surgical masks that partially cover part of the mouth part of the time – effect is 10%. That is, policy by itself does not help, the mask does.
Interesting in that famous Bangladesh study: as a result of mask introduction, villagers increased social distancing in the markets – but not in mosques. That is, the more religious goyim also think that Allah protects simple ones.
The term is “bald-faced”.
Braves, why is this language against Fauci disgusting? What this psycho did is disgusting. I pity anyone who fell for this narishkeit
I am sickened that some ppl here are supporting one of the worst domestic terrorists in US history.
He is the source of ALL the problems of the last 3 years
For a people who are taught ” הוי דן את כל אדם לקו זכות and “אל תדון את חברך עד שבא למקומך”
perhaps we should withhold nasty remarks.
The average person experienced Covid differently than Fauci and his responsibilities were vastly different.
To Dan the and other Fauci buddies, do you know at least who came up with this idea of declaring an emergency state? Hitler.
In January 1933, Adolf Hitler, leader of the Nazi Party, was appointed as chancellor, the head of the German government. On February 27, he stated that the German parliament building — the Reichstag — caught fire- which was a lie, all he did was to ask someone to take a picture of someone who was mentally ill near a fire, et voilà! Acting as chancellor, Hitler immediately accused “the communists” of being the perpetrators of the fire and claimed the arson was part of a larger effort to overthrow the German government. Using this justification, Hitler persuaded Hindenburg to enact the Reichstag Fire Decree. The decree abolished most civil liberties, including the right to speak, assemble, protest, and due process. Using the decree, the Nazis declared a state of emergency and began a violent crackdown against their political enemies. As Hitler cleared the political arena of anyone willing to challenge him, he contended that the decree was insufficient and required sweeping policies that would safeguard his emerging dictatorship. Hitler submitted a proposal to the Reichstag that if passed would immediately grant all legislative powers to the cabinet and by extension Hitler. This would in effect allow Hitler’s government to act without concern to the constitution.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
” The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The current status of this trio of lie-and-liar descriptors is this: both bold-faced and bald-faced are used, but bald-faced is decidedly the preferred term in published, edited text. Barefaced is the oldest, and is still in use, but it’s the least common. To report otherwise would be a bald-faced lie.