Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

“If masks don’t work, then why do surgeons wear them?”


itsnotoutthere
 Share

Recommended Posts

"A response to people who use the classic fallacious argument, “Well, if masks don’t work, then why do surgeons wear them?”

I’m a surgeon that has performed over 10,000 surgical procedures wearing a surgical mask. However, that fact alone doesn’t really qualify me as an expert on the matter. More importantly, I am a former editor of a medical journal. I know how to read the medical literature, distinguish good science from bad, and fact from fiction. Believe me, the medical literature is filled with bad fiction masquerading as medical science. It is very easy to be deceived by bad science.

First, let’s be clear. The premise that surgeons wearing masks serves as evidence that “masks must work to prevent viral transmission” is a logical fallacy that I would classify as an argument of false equivalence, or comparing “apples to oranges.”

Although surgeons do wear masks to prevent their respiratory droplets from contaminating the surgical field and the exposed internal tissues of our surgical patients, that is about as far as the analogy extends. Obviously, surgeons cannot “socially distance” from their surgical patients

The CoVID-19 pandemic is about viral transmission. Surgical and cloth masks do nothing to prevent viral transmission. We should all realize by now that face masks have never been shown to prevent or protect against viral transmission. Which is exactly why they have never been recommended for use during the seasonal flu outbreak, epidemics, or previous pandemics."

https://www.algora.com/Algora_blog/2020/09/23/if-masks-dont-work-then-why-do-surgeons-wear-them

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, odas said:

Quote "Although surgeons do wear masks to prevent their respiratory droplets from contaminating the surgical field and the exposed internal tissues of our surgical patients, that is about as far as the analogy extends."

And if the other side wears the mask for same or simmilar reasons we, while not completle eliminate, minimize the danger.

He put his own foot in his mouth.

Surgeon. Ha. My a$$.

"And if the other side wears the mask for same or simmilar reasons we, while not completle eliminate, minimize the danger."

I have no idea what that sentence means. Sorry.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Susanc241 said:

I was wondering how ‘masks don’t work’ fits in with the evidence they seem to have that the virus is spread in respiratory droplets.  Even if basic masks don’t help with the smaller aerosol particles they must help reduce the risk if they catch (some of) the bigger droplets.  
If you can’t give up your 60 cigarettes a day then reducing the amount by half or more must decrease the risk, if not by half or more, then by some degree.  Not a good analogy but the only one I could come up with on an empty stomach. Kitchen here I come.

That's a bit like saying "If you wear this new bullet proof vest only half the bullets will go through"  i.e. how much of the virus needs to penetrate  to give you Covid?

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Susanc241 said:

I was wondering how ‘masks don’t work’ fits in with the evidence they seem to have that the virus is spread in respiratory droplets.  Even if basic masks don’t help with the smaller aerosol particles they must help reduce the risk if they catch (some of) the bigger droplets.  
If you can’t give up your 60 cigarettes a day then reducing the amount by half or more must decrease the risk, if not by half or more, then by some degree.  Not a good analogy but the only one I could come up with on an empty stomach. Kitchen here I come.

I don't think it matters too much if "large" droplets cant get through a mask if the smaller ones already have gone through both masks.

It's like saying my farts would be smellier if I wasn't wearing pants

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

That's a bit like saying "If you wear this new bullet proof vest only half the bullets will go through"  i.e. how much of the virus needs to penetrate  to give you Covid?

A certain amount has to. It's called the minimum infective dose. A normal immune system can deal with a small amount of virus, while a larger amount causes a breakthrough.

Edited by zep73
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also from the link :-

"Surgeons and operating room personnel are well trained, experienced, and meticulous about maintaining sterility. We only wear fresh sterile masks. We don the mask in a sterile fashion. We wear the mask for short periods of time and change it out at the first signs of the excessive moisture build up that we know degrades mask effectiveness and increases their negative effects. Surgeons NEVER re-use surgical masks, nor do we ever wear cloth masks.

The public is being told to wear masks for which they have not been trained in the proper techniques. As a result, they are mishandling, frequently touching, and constantly reusing masks in a way that increase contamination and are more likely than not to increase transmission of disease."

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

That's a bit like saying "If you wear this new bullet proof vest only half the bullets will go through"  i.e. how much of the virus needs to penetrate  to give you Covid?

What are the key words in her post? It's 'reduce the risk' and 'decrease the risk'. So bullet proof vests would reduce the risks. :D

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, with VERY few exceptions, those who have bought-in to the government-approved narrative will never change their minds, no matter the quality or quantity of evidence placed before them.  As we've already seen in this thread, they mock the knowledge of people who are infinitely more educated than themselves and do so without the slightest qualm.  Why?  Because they have their own sources of information that they deem trustworthy.  They are comfortable with them and when others attempt to challenge them, unless it's someone they REALLY RESPECT, they simply dismiss and move on without investigating them at all.   At this point, I say let them, unless they are demanding to be obeyed by everyone else.  That is unacceptable.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Also from the link :-

"Surgeons and operating room personnel are well trained, experienced, and meticulous about maintaining sterility. We only wear fresh sterile masks. We don the mask in a sterile fashion. We wear the mask for short periods of time and change it out at the first signs of the excessive moisture build up that we know degrades mask effectiveness and increases their negative effects. Surgeons NEVER re-use surgical masks, nor do we ever wear cloth masks.

The public is being told to wear masks for which they have not been trained in the proper techniques. As a result, they are mishandling, frequently touching, and constantly reusing masks in a way that increase contamination and are more likely than not to increase transmission of disease."

Reusing a mask, touching it and wearing it for hours is not ideal, but it will keep catching droplets, and thereby decrease the risk of infection. It's pure logic.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, and then said:

IMO, with VERY few exceptions, those who have bought-in to the government-approved narrative will never change their minds, no matter the quality or quantity of evidence placed before them.  As we've already seen in this thread, they mock the knowledge of people who are infinitely more educated than themselves and do so without the slightest qualm.  Why?  Because they have their own sources of information that they deem trustworthy.  They are comfortable with them and when others attempt to challenge them, unless it's someone they REALLY RESPECT, they simply dismiss and move on without investigating them at all.   At this point, I say let them, unless they are demanding to be obeyed by everyone else.  That is unacceptable.  

You just described yourself.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, and then said:

IMO, with VERY few exceptions, those who have bought-in to the government-approved narrative will never change their minds, no matter the quality or quantity of evidence placed before them.  As we've already seen in this thread, they mock the knowledge of people who are infinitely more educated than themselves and do so without the slightest qualm.  Why?  Because they have their own sources of information that they deem trustworthy.  They are comfortable with them and when others attempt to challenge them, unless it's someone they REALLY RESPECT, they simply dismiss and move on without investigating them at all.   At this point, I say let them, unless they are demanding to be obeyed by everyone else.  That is unacceptable.  

Talking to yourself?

 

But I have my own questions about masks.  If each time you encounter an infected person, you run a 5% risk of being infected, ten eventually you are going to be infected, mask or no.

Doug

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

But I have my own questions about masks.  If each time you encounter an infected person, you run a 5% risk of being infected, ten eventually you are going to be infected, mask or no.

Studies have shown that it's the amount of time we spend with infected people, and how close we are to them, that matters.

See it like this: You spend 10 minutes close to an infected, that gives you 100 droplets. 20 minutes gives you 200. A.s.o...

Edited by zep73
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zep73 said:

Reusing a mask, touching it and wearing it for hours is not ideal, but it will keep catching droplets, and thereby decrease the risk of infection. It's pure logic.

Have you seen any of the videos available out there showing how exhaled vapors escape from the masks?  It's quite instructive. Nothing less than a properly fitted full respirator will work against viral contaminants.  The best example I can think of is the most direct comparison.  The CCP virologists were working with this type of virus in a BSL 4 lab.  

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5092084/

Biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) suit laboratories are specifically designed to study high-consequence pathogens for which neither infection prophylaxes nor treatment options exist. The hallmarks of these laboratories are: custom-designed airtight doors, dedicated supply and exhaust airflow systems, a negative-pressure environment, and mandatory use of positive-pressure (“space”) suits. The risk for laboratory specialists working with highly pathogenic agents is minimized through rigorous training and adherence to stringent safety protocols and standard operating procedures.

Researchers perform the majority of their work in BSL-2 laboratories and switch to BSL-4 suit laboratories when work with a high-consequence pathogen is required

If those who work in an environment where they are handling these pathogens must train and follow rigorous, time-consuming protocols and wear fully self-contained environment suits with their own AIR SUPPLY... how does one justify the idea that the same pathogen is being stopped or greatly reduced by ill fitting masks worn by people with exactly ZERO special training?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, and then said:

IMO, with VERY few exceptions, those who have bought-in to the government-approved narrative will never change their minds, no matter the quality or quantity of evidence placed before them.  As we've already seen in this thread, they mock the knowledge of people who are infinitely more educated than themselves and do so without the slightest qualm.  Why?  Because they have their own sources of information that they deem trustworthy.  They are comfortable with them and when others attempt to challenge them, unless it's someone they REALLY RESPECT, they simply dismiss and move on without investigating them at all.   At this point, I say let them, unless they are demanding to be obeyed by everyone else.  That is unacceptable.  

You know what AndThen? I'm so convinced by your thought provoking post, that I'm going to stop wearing rain coats in the rain and just get totally drenched from now on. Totally worth it! :w00t: :lol:

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, zep73 said:

You just described yourself.

That is YOUR opinion.  See how that works?  We ALL get to have them.  That's okay.  It only becomes a problem when one group decides their source of information is superior, more trustworthy, and as such should be used to demand compliance from OTHERS.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Talking to yourself?

 

But I have my own questions about masks.  If each time you encounter an infected person, you run a 5% risk of being infected, ten eventually you are going to be infected, mask or no.

Doug

Careful now Doug.  No thinking for yourself on masks! It could lead to more deaths through misinformation. You wouldn't want to be cancelled by your tolerant friends would you?

Edited by Hugh Mungus
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, and then said:

high-consequence pathogens for which neither infection prophylaxes nor treatment options exist.

Did you notice that?
They are talking about viruses far more dangerous than SARS-CoV-2.
And they are not just using one security measure, but several.
We also use several. Masks, distance, hand sanitizer, vaccines, limited social circles and sometimes lockdowns.

 

5 minutes ago, and then said:

That is YOUR opinion.  See how that works?  We ALL get to have them.  That's okay.  It only becomes a problem when one group decides their source of information is superior, more trustworthy, and as such should be used to demand compliance from OTHERS.

The superior sources never stand alone, but are backed up by scientific evidence and other sources, that say the same.

The compliance is needed to save lives, not to bother you.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Katniss said:

You know what AndThen? I'm so convinced by your thought provoking post, that I'm going to stop wearing rain coats in the rain and just get totally drenched from now on. Totally worth it! :w00t: :lol:

I don't really see your analogy working well.  Getting drenched rarely kills a person.  See the post about BSL4 labs and get back to me.  Failing that, maybe we can agree that part of the confusion here comes from the way we are defining efficacy for these masks.  I don't think anyone is arguing that a barrier in front of the nose and mouth is capable of stopping or at least rerouting the exhaled water vapor from our lungs.  It's a matter of the efficacy of stopping enough of the virions in the vapor to prevent transmission of the virus from one host to another.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

The head of an Oklahoma public health committee invited anti-vax doctors to talk with lawmakers about the coronavirus

(...)

An ophthalmologist paraded a series of internet conspiracy theories and unproven health claims before state lawmakers at a hearing at the Oklahoma Capitol this week — including that masks are ineffective at slowing the spread of the virus and that people of color need more vitamin D in their diets to prevent them from contracting COVID-19. 

(...)

Instead of an epidemiologist or virologist, State Rep. Sean Roberts, R-Hominy, who chairs the House of Representatives’ public health committee, invited two doctors who are vocal supporters of the anti-vaccine movement to speak at an informational hearing on Oklahoma’s response to the coronavirus pandemic on Tuesday. 

Full article

Hi covidiots, if you are in the ICU and you cannot breathe anymore, ask for treatment by an ophthalmologist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the early days of the pandemic, we were told masks don't work. They don't stop the spread.

Then it changed to only N95 masks are effective

Then it changed to any type of face covering is effective

Then it changed to double face masks are recommended

Then they admitted masks are simply a tool to show compliance with mandates

Then it went back to only N95 masks are effective at preventing the spread and cloth masks are basically useless
 

Forget the vaccines, this pandemic has exposed the incompetence of health agencies all over the world. Had this been a virus with 30% mortality rate, we would all be dead as a result of following their constantly shifting guidelines. They really don't know what the hell they are talking about and that's very unnerving to me.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, zep73 said:

They are talking about viruses far more dangerous than SARS-CoV-2.

zep... unless you are taking the position that the Wuhan lab was not working with this TYPE of virus then your argument is specious at best.  We are discussing the specific use of MASKS to stop the transmission of a virus.  Obviously, if there is enough distance between people, there can be no contamination.  But that isn't the topic, is it?  MASKS... 

The work that was being done in that BSL4 lab was about studying respiratory viruses to find a way to stop or minimize the chances of another SARS or MERS contagion.  Your definition for "infection prophylaxes nor treatment options" doesn't match mine.  To me, that means these are viruses with no known treatment or cure.  EXACTLY the case for SARS-COV-2.    Now, that's the reality.  Wear your mask, take your vaccine(s) when the bureaucrat demands it off you, but leave me alone about my choice.  IF the measures our governments have demanded are truly about public health, then Omicron is going to verify it.  If those measures are about control, Omicron is going to make THAT apparent, as well.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, zep73 said:

The compliance is needed to save lives, not to bother you.

Many Americans feel harassed when you ask them to do something that has nothing to do with barbecuing. :lol:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.