copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-09-22): Flawed reasoning: The claim implies that masks are ineffective or useless against COVID-19, otherwise non-mask wearers should be dead. However, protective equipment can be recommended or necessary even against diseases that are not systematically deadly. The claim also forgets to consider that the use of masks reduces the propagation of the virus among the population and thus indirectly limits the risk of exposure of non-mask wearers. [...] In August 2020, a post circulating on social media, which received millions of views, questioned how people who are not wearing face masks in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic have still remained alive. Using the rhetorical technique of "just asking questions", this claim suggests that masks are ineffective or useless against COVID-19. This reasoning is based on the premise that a protective device is only efficient and necessary if 100% of people not using it dies. Such logic is actually flawed and inconsistent with the available knowledge about the disease. [...] Altogether, this shows that being exposed to SARS-CoV-2 does not give a 100% chance of getting infected, and getting infected does not always result in death. Therefore, it is well within expectations that most people who do not wear masks are still alive, and this cannot be used to make conclusions about the usefulness or efficiency of masks.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2024-09-10): "It’s true that masks are most effective when everyone around you is wearing them. If someone is infected with COVID-19 and doesn’t know it, their mask is like putting a thumb over the end of a hose, preventing the virus from spewing," says Jaimie Meyer, an infectious disease physician at Yale Medicine. [...] To be effective, the CDC emphasizes masks must be worn consistently. Some people in areas with high transmission may think they are safe without a mask indoors when they remain more than six feet from others in the room. But it’s a misconception that keeping your distance inside reduces your risk of exposure completely, says Linsey Marr, professor of engineering at Virginia Tech and an expert on viral transmission. It’s true that viral particles are concentrated closest to an infected individual, she says, but just as cigarette smoke eventually spreads throughout a room, so, too, does the coronavirus. [...] Anyone not currently wearing a mask still should keep it at the ready, experts say.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-06-21): Yes, Wearing Masks Helps. Here's Why [...] Researchers emphasize there are two main reasons to wear masks. There's some evidence of protection for the wearer, but the stronger evidence is that masks protect others from catching an infection from the person wearing the mask. And infected people can spread the virus just by talking. [...] Other recent studies offer indirect evidence for universal mask use, even if worn by people who are feeling healthy. One study, published in late May in BMJ Global Health, looked at people in households in Beijing where one person was confirmed to have COVID-19. At the time, explains study co-author Raina MacIntyre, research was already showing that the majority of transmission of the virus was happening inside households, and China already had a culture of mask wearing. The study found that in households where everyone was wearing a face mask indoors as a precaution before they knew anyone who lived there was sick, the risk of transmission was cut by 79%.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2023-09-19): For months, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention maintained that the only people who needed to wear face masks were people who were ill or those who were treating them. That notion stemmed from the idea that basic medical masks do little to protect wearers, and instead primarily prevent sick people from spewing infectious droplets from their noses and mouths. Plus, limited supplies needed to be prioritized for frontline health workers. The World Health Organization agreed. [...] At the same time, other scientists point to lab studies that indicate a broader adoption of masks, even of less effective do-it-yourself models, could still be helpful. And it’s possible widespread mask use could keep people from touching their faces and help convey the severity of the pandemic. [...] Other scientists, however, disagree, and say that while masks won’t be fully effective, they are likely to be better than nothing.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2023-04-06): The Jan. 30 review found that based on existing randomized controlled trials — which tested the effectiveness of interventions encouraging people to wear masks, rather than testing the effectiveness of masks themselves — wearing masks in the community "probably makes little or no difference" to the number of people with influenza or COVID-19-like illnesses. [...] "Many people hate wearing masks, including people who believe that masks are truly very protective. Any intervention that must be sustained for long periods but people find difficult to sustain is not a great intervention," she said. [...] Bundgaard, Henning et al. "Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers: A Randomized Controlled Trial." Annals of Internal Medicine. 18 Nov 2020.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2021-07-21): One review of six studies estimated mask-wearing reduced the risk of catching Covid by 60%, and 70% among healthcare staff.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2024-05-22): A comprehensive new review published in Clinical Microbiology Reviews provides strong evidence that masks and respirators are effective in reducing the transmission of respiratory infections like COVID-19. The review, conducted by an international team of 13 researchers, analysed over 400 studies from multiple disciplines, including epidemiology, public health, engineering, and social sciences. 'Our review confirms that masks work, with a clear dose-response effect,' said lead author Professor Trisha Greenhalgh from the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford. 'The more consistently and correctly you wear a mask, the better protected you are. Respirators, when worn continuously, provide even greater protection than ordinary masks.' [...] 'Masks are not just a technical intervention, but also a social and cultural one,' said co-author Professor Deborah Lupton from the University of New South Wales. 'To be effective, mask policies need to be grounded in an understanding of people's beliefs, behaviours, and real-world constraints.'
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2024-06-30): Face mask effectiveness: What science knows now [...] No mask is 100% effective. An N95, for example, is named as such because it is at least 95% efficient at blocking airborne particles when used properly. But even if a mask has an 80% efficiency, Marr said, it still offers meaningful protection.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2021-08-24): Absolutely nothing changed about the efficacy of masks between February and April 2020. The CDC may have developed concerns about asymptomatic infection, but the agency didn't uncover new data showing that universal masking would blunt viral transmission any better than it had in years past. Indeed, such evidence was "scarce," as a March 2020 Lancet Respiratory Medicine article pointed out. [...] Moreover, randomized clinical trials have shown inconsistent or inconclusive results, with some studies reporting only a marginal benefit or no effect of mask use. Thus, surgical and similar masks are often considered to be ineffective. On the other hand, observational data show that regions or facilities with a higher percentage of the population wearing masks have better control of COVID-19.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2022-05-23): Figure 2 depicts heat maps of reduced transmission and deaths over 6 months as a function of varied source control efficacy and wearer protection efficacy. Mask wearing rates by the various sub-populations in the model are provided in the figure caption. These rates were in line with surveys of mask usage in the United States in May and June 202028. The colored bands of the plots represent contours of relative reduction. Going from the bottom left corner of the figures (source control efficacy and wearer protection efficacy both 0%, equivalent to no mask wearing in the population) these increase in 5% increments to the right top corner (source control efficacy and wearer protection efficacy both 100%). For example, to obtain at least a 50% reduction in cumulative infections, source control would need to be at least 55% efficacious in limiting transmission in the population for arbitrary wearer protection efficacy. Source control would need to be approximately 45% effective to reduce the number of deaths by half regardless of wearer protection efficacy.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-03-31): Up until this point, the general consensus among the scientific and medical communities was that healthy people should not be wearing face masks unless they are directly caring for an infected person. But now, a growing chorus proclaims that everybody should be wearing masks, just like the citizens of many Asian countries. This confusion can be shown in just two headlines from the past 24 hours: CNN: WHO stands by recommendation to not wear masks if you are not sick or not caring for someone who is sick
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-06-26): Another study looked at coronavirus deaths across 198 countries and found that those with cultural norms or government policies favoring mask-wearing had lower death rates. [...] Masks may be more effective as a "source control" because they can prevent larger expelled droplets from evaporating into smaller droplets that can travel farther. [...] The latest forecast from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation suggests that 33,000 deaths could be avoided by October 1 if 95 percent of people wore masks in public.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-10-29): Health officials understood that radically changing public behavior was a difficult undertaking, especially since many found masks uncomfortable to wear. Appeals to patriotism could go only so far. As one Sacramento official noted, people "must be forced to do the things that are for their best interests." The Red Cross bluntly stated that "the man or woman or child who will not wear a mask now is a dangerous slacker." Numerous communities, particularly across the West, imposed mandatory ordinances. Some sentenced scofflaws to short jail terms, and fines ranged from US $5 to $200. [...] It is difficult to ascertain the effectiveness of the masks used in 1918. Today, we have a growing body of evidence that well-constructed cloth face coverings are an effective tool in slowing the spread of COVID-19. It remains to be seen, however, whether Americans will maintain the widespread use of face masks as our current pandemic continues to unfold. Deeply entrenched ideals of individual freedom, the lack of cohesive messaging and leadership on mask wearing, and pervasive misinformation have proven to be major hindrances thus far, precisely when the crisis demands consensus and widespread compliance. This was certainly the case in many communities during the fall of 1918. That pandemic ultimately killed about 675,000 people in the U.S. Hopefully, history is not in the process of repeating itself today.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2024-07-15): While masks are no longer required in most areas, Stanford Medicine still strongly recommend wearing one when inside and encourages visitors to be fully vaccinated. Some departments, including those that serve high-risk patients, may continue to require masking.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2022-11-07): I do not enjoy wearing masks. But I’m immunocompromised, so it’s a necessity. I’ve had to make negotiations and concessions with myself to return to some pre-pandemic activities, and going to the gym is a nonnegotiable. If you happen to be at an LA Fitness or a YMCA in the greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area, you just might see me, playing ball or doing curls with a mask. And you will know that it’s me, because I am the only person younger than Methuselah with one on. [...] A predictable outcome of the pandemic is the gradual erosion of my concern about whether other people mask. In the spring of 2021, after I got the vaccines and started doing things indoors around strangers again, masks were a necessity. If I walked into a place and the majority of people did not have them, I walked out. Now, with few exceptions — I still ask my barber and Uber drivers to mask — I just don’t care as much about what everyone else does. If I allowed other people’s feelings about masks to dictate my activity now, I’d never leave the house.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-07-07): News organizations repeated these claims. In late February, Forbes ran a piece with the headline "No, You DO NOT Need Face Masks For Coronavirus—They Might Increase Your Infection Risk." The story has since been viewed more than 4.5 million times; it was also updated (including the headline) to reflect changing mask guidance. Jerome Adams, the surgeon general, tweeted to implore Americans to "STOP BUYING MASKS," which drove a further round of coverage. On March 2, Adams appeared on Fox & Friends to hammer home the point; masks, he said, had "not been proven to be effective in preventing the spread of coronavirus amongst the general public."
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-04-01): The authors and CIDRAP have received requests in recent weeks to remove this article from the CIDRAP website. Reasons have included: (1) we don’t truly know that cloth masks (face coverings) are not effective, since the data are so limited, (2) wearing a cloth mask or face covering is better than doing nothing, (3) the article is being used by individuals and groups to support non-mask wearing where mandated and (4) there are now many modeling studies suggesting that cloth masks or face coverings could be effective at flattening the curve and preventing many cases of infection. [...] There is no evidence that surgical masks worn by healthcare workers are effective at limiting the emission of small particles or in preventing contamination of wounds during surgery. [...] Leaving aside the fact that they are ineffective, telling the public to wear cloth or surgical masks could be interpreted by some to mean that people are safe to stop isolating at home. It's too late now for anything but stopping as much person-to-person interaction as possible.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2021-03-09): Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the efficacy of community mask wearing to reduce the spread of respiratory infections was controversial because there were no solid relevant data to support their use. During the pandemic, the scientific evidence has increased. Compelling data now demonstrate that community mask wearing is an effective nonpharmacologic intervention to reduce the spread of this infection, especially as source control to prevent spread from infected persons, but also as protection to reduce wearers’ exposure to infection. [...] Community mask wearing substantially reduces transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2 ways. First, masks prevent infected persons from exposing others to SARS-CoV-2 by blocking exhalation of virus-containing droplets into the air (termed source control). This aspect of mask wearing is especially important because it is estimated that at least 50% or more of transmissions are from persons who never develop symptoms or those who are in the presymptomatic phase of COVID-19 illness.1 In recent laboratory experiments, multilayer cloth masks were more effective than single-layer masks, blocking as much as 50% to 70% of exhaled small droplets and particles.2,3 In some cases, cloth masks have performed similar to surgical or procedure masks for source control. Second, masks protect uninfected wearers. Masks form a barrier to large respiratory droplets that could land on exposed mucous membranes of the eye, nose, and mouth. Masks can also partially filter out small droplets and particles from inhaled air. Multiple layers of fabric and fabrics with higher thread counts improve filtration.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2024-05-23): COVID-19 and other respiratory viruses continue to circulate, and we know that wearing well-fitted masks helps to decrease the transmission of all kinds of respiratory illnesses. In general, people should consider wearing a well-fitting, high-quality mask, such as a KF94, KN95 or N95, in crowded or poorly ventilated indoor settings, especially if they are at higher risk for severe disease or when the prevalence of respiratory diseases such as COVID-19 or influenza is high or increasing. In any setting, people can always choose to wear masks around others for added protection, and everyone should respect others’ choices around their health. [...] No. Masks are no longer required on public transportation. Individuals are encouraged to consider masking based on location, crowd, and personal risk factors, especially when an individual or the people they live with are vulnerable to the worst outcomes of COVID-19. This includes on public transportation, while waiting for public transportation indoors, and when driving or riding in a taxi or rideshare vehicle.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2022-06-24): Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians and other health professionals have continued to stress the everyday necessity and importance of wearing masks to protect against the spread of SARS-CoV-2. While reusable cloth masks have been recommended until recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other experts acknowledge N95, KN95 or KF94 masks provide the most protection when in public indoor spaces given how transmissible the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant is.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2020-09-08): While masks help to keep some large respiratory droplets contained and from reaching other people, they are not perfect. If you are sick with COVID-19 or think you might have COVID-19, wearing a mask does not make it safe or acceptable to visit public areas or be close to other people. Isolate yourself, whether or not you have symptoms. Stay home except when directed by your medical provider to get medical care. As much as possible, stay in a specific room and away from other people and pets in your home, use a separate bathroom if available, and do not share personal items like cups, towels or utensils. If you need to be around other people or animals within your own home, you should wear a mask, and be sure to frequently wash your hands. Those with underlying medical conditions who find it more difficult to breathe when wearing a mask can check with their health care provider to determine if a mask is appropriate for you. Masks should not be worn by children under the age of two or anyone who has trouble breathing, is unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance.
Claim: If masks were effective and necessary, non-mask wearers should be dead by now (Facebook Users, 2020-07-30)
Evidence (2023-09-15): "People can make their own choices about wearing masks to protect against COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases now," says Karen Jubanyik, MD, a Yale Medicine emergency medicine specialist who has cared for patients with COVID-19. [...] Wearing a mask may be a personal choice when visiting a doctor or a hospital. Not all medical centers require masks now, although some that abandoned mask mandates are discussing bringing them back in response to the recent uptick in COVID-19 cases. [...] Wearing masks in this setting could help protect you and others from viruses that can also exacerbate any underlying conditions, causing such problems as lung disease flares, arrhythmias, and even death, according to the article.
Claim: “Bill Gates’ shoddily-hastened vaccine has been determined to make all animal test subjects get COVID-19 when exposed to the virus“ (Anonymous, 2020-08-06)
Evidence (2020-08-06): Cherry-picking: The article selectively highlights the finding that viral genetic material was isolated from vaccinated monkeys, but fails to report that vaccinated monkeys were protected from developing viral pneumonia, a common COVID-19 complication. Misleading: The article refers to the Oxford group’s vaccine as Bill Gates’ vaccine, suggesting that Gates has a direct hand in vaccine research and development. While Bill Gates does contribute funding to COVID-19 vaccine efforts, he is not a scientist, nor does he have any medical or scientific credentials, and therefore is not qualified to conduct vaccine research and development.
Claim: “Bill Gates’ shoddily-hastened vaccine has been determined to make all animal test subjects get COVID-19 when exposed to the virus“ (Anonymous, 2020-08-06)
Evidence (2020-04-30): The smallpox vaccine was far from perfect, but it got the job done. The COVID-19 vaccine might be similar. If we were designing the perfect vaccine, we’d want it to be completely safe and 100 percent effective. It should be a single dose that gives you lifelong protection, and it should be easy to store and transport. I hope the COVID-19 vaccine has all of those qualities, but given the timeline we’re on, it may not.
Claim: “Bill Gates’ shoddily-hastened vaccine has been determined to make all animal test subjects get COVID-19 when exposed to the virus“ (Anonymous, 2020-08-06)
Evidence (2020-12-25): Bill Gates and Microsoft (MSFT) were the driving force behind modern computer software, ushering in the digital age in the 1980s and becoming, for a time, the world’s most powerful company. And somehow, while Gates was building an empire and enjoying his status as the richest person on earth, he was also quietly setting up what would become the second major focus of his life: philanthropy. And it is in part thanks to that work that the COVID-19 vaccine that is currently rolling out was achieved in record time. [...] Since the emergence of COVID-19, Bill Gates has been one of the most familiar public faces on the airwaves, and for good reason. This was the moment, without knowing it, the foundation had been preparing for.