Yay! The article that I published several days ago regarding a Danish face mask study, which was refused publication by three major medical journals, has now been published as Danmask-19 by Annals of Internal Medicine. Although this Randomised Controlled Study (RCT) was on Danish mask wearers, this study is relevant. for everyone. Here is a sample text taken from Prof Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson writing for The Spectator.
Yesterday (18 November 2020) marked the publication of a long-delayed trial in Denmark which hopes to answer that very question. The ‘Danmask-19 trial’ was conducted in the spring with over 6,000 participants, when the public were not being told to wear masks but other public health measures were in place. Unlike other studies looking at masks, the Danmask study was a randomised controlled trial – making it the highest quality scientific evidence.
Around half of those in the trial received 50 disposable surgical face masks, which they were told to change after eight hours of use. After one month, the trial participants were tested using both PCR, antibody and lateral flow tests and compared with the trial participants who did not wear a mask.
In the end, there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19. 1.8 per cent of those wearing masks caught Covid, compared to 2.1 per cent of the control group. As a result, it seems that any effect masks have on preventing the spread of the disease in the community is small.
Read the rest of the article. I think The Spectator allow the reading of five articles before they require a subscription.
Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers PDF
