The Norwegian Institute of Public Health announces study to see if masks reduce infection

[Kalliope]

The institute (FHI) shared the news today that they are recruiting 5 000 participants for a randomised trial where one group will wear masks in crowds and public places for 14 days, and the other group will not wear a mask.

This is to "find out if the usage of masks reduces the probability to get airway symptoms from virus and bacteria causing air way infection, as COVID-19".

The mask-wearing group does not have to wear the mask at home - or at work!

There's no information about what kind of mask is going to be used. The spokesperson from FHI, Atle Fretheim, wore a surgical mask, not an FFp2.

I have a feeling they're pretty sure already the results will show no benefit of using masks. Atle Fretheim has also done a study on whether wearing glasses could provide a protection from Covid, but the study didn't control for whether those who wore glasses (or not) were using masks so I guess he already thinks it doesn't matter much.

https://www.fhi.no/studier/munnbindstudien/om-studien/

 

[TigerLilea]

As the flu and colds were greatly decreased over the past two years, wouldn't that indicate that masks do protect us from viruses?

 

[Kalliope]

I have some doubts whether this study will bring us any more clarity to the issue..

 

[rvallee]

I still can't believe that medicine, of all the professions, uses the absolute lowest form of evidence that exists, evidence so flimsy and uninterpretable that no other profession would be caught dead justifying anything with such mediocre evidence, not even some random cafeteria's lunch menu. It will never cease to shock me.

This is a completely useless study, it's shocking in its ineptitude. You can't put physics to a damn vote. Physics works. Reliably. Something medicine can't bother with.

 

[Kalliope]

The study is now finished, but it seems to be difficult to find a journal willing to publish it.

 

[RedFox]

Nothing about the type of masks. Cloth and surgical masks are garbage at preventing the wearer from being infected. Wear N95s (or your country's equivalent) folks.

 

[Midnattsol]

Nothing about the type of masks. Cloth and surgical masks are garbage at preventing the wearer from being infected. Wear N95s (or your country's equivalent) folks.

It was surgical masks, and you did not have to wear them all the time (that would be too much effort), so for example I could meet people at work with the mask around their neck because to wear it at work was not a requirement. Completely useless, and the idea that this is "real word use case" is... I don't even know where to start.

When NIPH, among others, have said masks have no effect then sure the real world usecase is that people will not thing they make any difference. Contrast with guidelines for how to use condoms, exercise, eat healthy etc. where we know misinformation makes compliance to guidelines worse.

With the way discourse around masks have been, one cannot just hand out masks and that's that. You have to at the same time be clear about how to use them and why. It's like me telling people they should eat healthy, and then just assume they know what healthy means by looking at the latest newspaper dietary advise about healthy eating.. and as with special dietary needs, negative press about doing something makes it harder for those doing the thing. Media stories about how food intolerances are psychological in origin? People with food intolerances are not taken seriously and mocked. Using a mask while the media claims it can even be harmful? Same. That's the thing we in public health should work against.

/rant

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

The main point of wearing masks was supposed to be to protect OTHER PEOPLE. So this study looks like a nonsense?

Also, to be much use to oneself mask wearing almost certainly needs to be associated with vigilance that ensures regular hand washing etc. Otherwise the mask just transfers infections. Motivation to hand wash introduces confounders...

 

[RedFox]

The main point of wearing masks was supposed to be to protect OTHER PEOPLE. So this study looks like a nonsense?

Low-effectiveness masks (cloth and surgical) provide minimal protection against getting infection and a little protection against spreading it. An N95 mask without an exhalation valve provides excellent protection both ways. An N95 mask with an exhalation valve primarily protects the user. And protecting only the mask user is still epidemiologically useful because uninfected people can't spread diseases.