@KGLiebowitz FWIW, my views on the efficacy of universal masking solidified in May 2020 when my former hometown had two symptomatic hair stylists who serviced 139 clients before discovering they had COVID. Stylists and clients were all masked. Not one tran
@rubin_allergy @benryanwriter FYI Ben, speaking of censorship the blue checked doctor blocked me for tweeting this. Talk about deleting one side of the debate. The hairdresser study is really bad: https://t.co/OSlJfGhD8R
@ianmSC @JeromeAdamsMD How could I have been so careless to have forgotten the CDC's hair stylist masking study! It's even better with the hair dryer graphics and footnote about wearing cloth face covering correctly to slow the spread. My search for the f
@FreckledLiberty @76stargazer @beewaa1 @deborahlurie Their empty headed followers could have seen through them by *following the science* rather than following the bureaucracy. Their "hairdresser mask study," for instance, was about as scientific as saying
@TheLeadCNN @drsanjaygupta They are not going far enough. They should be moving all education to occur inside hairdresser studios. It's been proven that masks are 100% effective there. https://t.co/YccEMDmn4J
@welschwise @XRPSILVERSURFER @KingKreg @CryptoBull2020 https://t.co/ii0ADvjzzy this was a really cool real world study early in the pandemic. Cloth masks def lost effectiveness with each new more infectious strain
@kylenabecker But CDC’s masking policies are based on observational data from 2 barbers. REALLY! https://t.co/lqqbu7xFO6
@KrauthBen @apsmunro Humbly venture this as the most ridiculous pro masking study. https://t.co/CF05JuGJ0b
@Reroot_Flyover @TheDrJon @snorman1776 @greg_travis @EmeraldCityMD @TheEliKlein It’s their favorite study: https://t.co/OSlJfGhD8R
@GeoFreC @JamesMelville https://t.co/0GBYxr8eaF This seems like the best data until you see that 52% of clients rejected testing. What amazing, high-quality data.
@larsweisbrod https://t.co/zjrTaNmpnZ Immernoch Zweifel? Diese Studie ist in der von Herrn Lauterbach verlinkten "Mega-Studie" inkludiert. Bestens geeignet, querschwurbelnde Wissenschaftsleugner in die Schranken zu weisen.
Parmi les 13 études, 3 exemples avec : - les liens ci-dessous ; - les commentaires d'Eugyppius dans les PJ qui montrent que les conclusions n'ont ni queue ni tête. https://t.co/so8aObGO3b https://t.co/1i5PHAlS63 https://t.co/ZB5IRwFgbW 4/5 https://t.c
כמו עם החיסונים - כשהמסקנות רצויות אין בעיה ללמוד מאנקדוטות ("מסכות עוזרות! עובדה: מעצבת שיער עם מסכה לא הדביקה לקוחות". "מחקר" אמיתי שה CDC הסתמך עליו. וכמובן ה'עמך' "התחסנתי / שמתי מסיכה ולא נדבקתי, עובדה") >> https://t.co/Q5LThOIAo6
@RealTanMan1980 The two-person hairdresser mask study is still on the CDC website. https://t.co/6fWsNgaTe6
@TruncatedJest @rTIKId @STOPmaskingKIDS @Saikmedi Anecdata, not a real study. The 2 stylists were mildly ill, mainly wore cloth masks. One worked through symptoms for 8 days before testing positive, the other 5 days. 72/139 clients refused PCR testing when
@TrollAdopt @nanakaren11 @DFisman @JoltinJoe1970 You really need me to explain what is wrong with a study like this? https://t.co/2u47uVONZb
@Andy56351281 @JoltinJoe1970 @DrKateTO @DFisman @UofT There's also this #gem, mon #amour... https://t.co/2x3DNSlumd
@faithalone741 @claymarsh A Simple Experiement https://t.co/5DiKwGuou1 https://t.co/cdLfgF7UW8 Case Study The same is business insider https://t.co/epVdSOHP50
@RepLisaReynolds I actually would have preferred if you cited the hairdresser anecdote instead your own personal anecdote. https://t.co/6ho2Bsk4WW
@HealthAnthony @Mc70599 @leoniedelt @ConcernedScien7 @HelenRSalisbury @ianmSC I'm not sure I even need to comment on it. You'll just say it's good enough evidence for you to support a mask mandate either way. https://t.co/XtwU4WQQtL
Apparent absence of covid transmission at hair salon with face covering policy https://t.co/KvKGYE9od4 #Apparent #CovidTransmission #HairSalon
@GGDMM @PBalabam [16] https://t.co/Z3Iupyc67C In cui c'è semplicemente un "aneddoto" in cui due parrucchieri positivi al covid usavano la mask e non hanno infettato i clienti. Non dimostra niente, a livello statistico. 3/
@FormerDemocrat_ @gov_fails Well, to be fully transparent, there is a cdc mmwr that this was front and center - which is what really got the ball rolling on the mask thing. https://t.co/cNdWsddQUc
@JeromeAdamsMD @adarkgodarises When the CDC presents this as a study it is depending on for policy decisions, "Houston, we have a problem"! But they add it for volume because it "showed" what they want it to show. Absence of Apparent Transmission of SARS-
RT @dawso007: No access but the answer is clearly yes - based on the number of HCPs who did not get COVID surrounded by the unmasked and th…
No access but the answer is clearly yes - based on the number of HCPs who did not get COVID surrounded by the unmasked and the lack of transmission from 2 symptomatic masked hair stylists to 139 clients: https://t.co/zqY62ICXN4
Absence of Apparent Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Two Stylists... https://t.co/WDHylBCXVK via @CDCgov
@Borisdeescorpio @decimononnica Shhh burro, lea. https://t.co/R49uyMPL8V
@MarceloAndresGu @decimononnica Shhh tema cerrado https://t.co/R49uyMPL8V
@covizombie @decimononnica ¿Qué?🤣 Tomate la pastilla que se nota que no te anda muy bien el balero, ignorante. ¿Además insultás atrás de una pantalla, gil blandito? https://t.co/R49uyMPL8V
@TheBiostat @KabirCreates @beenwrekt @mushfiq_econ You forget the other «high quality» study cited by the CDC: the one with the hairdressers that didn’t contaminate their clients because they were wearing masks! That’s the one who killed their credibility
@Filmnoir11 @AstorAaron There are quite a few, but here's one I've looked at: https://t.co/OgdjHtgtvi
@ABC She justified the masks as being effective by the "Hair Stylist Study." (Link) Totally unbelievable. She also pushed for lockdowns and harmed millions of people who knew that there was and is no indication it would help. It is tragic, actually. Terri
@colorblindk1d @NPR 100% effective https://t.co/eYZupuXa7K
@pudgenet @RmwBlacksodder @MickeyMcmeans CDC STUDY 2 infected hair stylists, no spread to clients. https://t.co/78NRsaK02P https://t.co/UnsiXUp5C9 Assoc. of American Medical Colleges https://t.co/mQmYCbaRIu
@choo_ek @asosin One of the most hopeful moments of the entire pandemic was when the hair salon in Missouri opened in 2020 and got infected stylists but no known infected clients due to masking and no inside waiting. https://t.co/Je5E9lsdI7
@dillon_cordial @StymeBey @MutmasterJ @jessica_tyciak @Rap Here’s the scientific journal https://t.co/aafLnGlIwf If only your cavs were so lucky 😂😂
@RobSHarrison74 @ccwicks @Deadferrets That’s just flat false.
@angrybklynmom @DrLeanaWen Is the two-person hairdresser study not evidence enough for you? https://t.co/6fWsNgaTe6
@RodneyCorbine @GustavineLe @WaltersMeinung https://t.co/9cDdVyefgc Wenn schlechte maskenetikette befolgt wird, weil alle nur noch den Regeln folgen anstatt es als infektionsscbutz zu betrachten, bringen die nix mehr, ja. Aber wenn man richtig trägt ist ei
@CarCarr5 @JayRishe @AllyKeyLime @CharlesHenryC19 @SarahOC_MECFS A facial covering does not prevent the spread of an airborne disease? How does that work exactly? Jesus Christ, you morons just make up your own reality, don't you? https://t.co/zwN8laBJvo
@johnwadoherty @WatcherAfar @flindall_steve @robfoot Many are anecdotal - you missed the one about the hairdressers?? The CDC used that one in their initial report that recommended masking for all. https://t.co/JObWN3XoNs
@jtjG57PEu5AanQN マスクは自分の感染予防効果は薄いけど、周りへの感染を防ぐ効果はあるってのが通説ですよね。 感染してた美容師がマスク無しで接した家族と同僚は感染したけど、お互いマスクして接した客は100人以上で感染0だったとか。 https://t.co/Xj57oHJg2l
@Dave99117584 One of the very early things that moved me from being a mask skeptic to a mask believer was the Great Clips incident in Springfield, MO. Two symptomatic stylists. 139 exposed clients. Stylists and clients all masked. No transmission. CDC repo
@You3_JP マスクは水分子0.003umより大きい0.1um(ウィルスと同サイズ)で性能をテストされてるし、比較対象として不適。 他社への感染を防ぐ効果はあるってのが通説だよ。 感染者の美容師がマスク無しで接した家族同僚は感染し、お互いマスクして接した客は感染0の例。 ↓ https://t.co/Xj57oHJg2l
@kuratamagohan 効果に関しては着用者本人の感染予防はデンマークの研究で10-20%。劇的な効果はなし。 ただし感染者が拡散させるのを防ぐ効果は大きいってのが通説。 感染者の美容師がマスクを着けて接した濃厚接触者100人以上に誰も移さなかった事例。 https://t.co/Xj57oHJg2l
@LaFlemm47312772 @Ba_Serrano @OSS117_Helsinki S'il te plait, pour une fois, fait au moins semblant de les lire. https://t.co/obzrjdN4bK
@grimtryst @EMac1957 @99_redballoonz @Sandyboots2020 It's a source control measure that works very well. https://t.co/g1Sd1mFpKe
@PaulRoundy1 @JeremyFarrar @EricTopol Your back of the napkin math makes a lot of assumptions and flies in the face of actual studies about how well masks work: https://t.co/xtd8KOnJc1
@MaskBreathable1 @EricTopol @CDCMMWR There are waiting rooms, lecture halls, salons, etc. where you can observe full masking. Below is one example where everyone was wearing a mask. Are there any documented outbreaks in similar settings? https://t.co/g
@scottyd121 @johntwilcox @EricTopol @CDCMMWR The reality is fully masked settings do exist. Here is a setting where everyone was masked. Where are the documented outbreaks in similar settings? https://t.co/gLhOAw3avB
@GlennWa33737801 It could be any of those settings as long as everyone was wearing a mask the whole time. Like a salon. https://t.co/gLhOAw3avB
@LaFlemm47312772 @pamp69 Juste quelques références en faveur du port du masque : -https://t.co/4lIf1c6hw3 -https://t.co/AkTmIFb8k1 -https://t.co/P41N4IleiP -https://t.co/IuN0MBKNze -https://t.co/mkV5Grvcyk -https://t.co/4TdYJ8K3q8 -https://t.co/IlYpwpXg0
@sfdb @JeremyRedfernFL Here’s an example of an anecdote paraded as a study: 2 masked hairdressers didn’t give Covid to their clients, the majority of whom were never tested, so we actually don’t know! This was the major new evidence universal masking was b
@mominbayarea Just for clarification: BOTH the hairdressers wore masks. There wasn't even a control https://t.co/IP4InLTVwO
Absence of Apparent Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Two Stylists After Exposure at a Hair Salon https://t.co/SFsthmIskf
@Montaigne01 That's my favourite one too! https://t.co/jEZUoo7iC5
@KielnotKiel @Ciccio_87XX @alisat22 @VPrasadMDMPH That's first-hand data that I've seen duplicated with other relatives who were vaccinated - far more pepole than the 2 that the CDC relied on for its "proof" that masks work https://t.co/w65im3y67G
@gabrielmalor @Patterico the CDC’s first published study on masks showed masks were 100% effective. https://t.co/eYZupuXa7K
@CJFG39711118 @anitambyrne @CMOIreland Time for a new computer. https://t.co/3o6qgXMShJ https://t.co/gYsyyW5d0j https://t.co/9Geo0jUerR This is a nice case study: https://t.co/8kELf8xTgG
@FrancieNolan6 Just theatre - https://t.co/3C4B8PdT1F
@helper409 @CureLiberalism1 @c0nc0rdance 7. https://t.co/qeBdi65RYO 8. https://t.co/AVT3IVQv4x 9. https://t.co/L9prL8pWOg 10. https://t.co/jIj8d5u5Y1 11. https://t.co/2ths2Gbj3R Now, please dispute my peer-review, published references or provide your alle
@alexisderoode @koopmanswil @Nieuwsuur >>3. Dát was 2020 de stand v kennis. Daarna geleidelijk verschuiving naar meer nadruk op aerosole route, door meer onderzoek, nieuwe waarnemingen. Belangrijk keerpunt: deze studie uit VS. Juli 2020. https://t.co
@grave_acid @thatsnotmine125 maybe here? https://t.co/aN7X0ifMQf
@GetRobs @SquawkCNBC @GovNedLamont Masks work. https://t.co/IVcbn3228S
@drmikehart @birb_k But were they hairdressers? We should only base our policies on hairdressers. https://t.co/AreIoIUGI3
@rwjdingwall @LucyGoBag @whippletom All of what CDC published on masks in the last ~two years has been garbage. As an aside, and not to say it's guarantee of quality or lack of bias, MMWR is not peer-reviewed. One of CDC's early, key articles was the fa
@igotnuthin @dianaberrent Riiiiiight... https://t.co/dabnQNkUtg
@pablogonzalezt @FelipeMiguelBA Yo no soy nadie para "explicar". Solo confío más en aportes científicos que en políticos que acomodan las medidas sanitarias a las encuestas. https://t.co/ptqdkuAchi https://t.co/n7uTFVkstC https://t.co/DDDdDzwfsz https://t
When they talk about “studies” supporting universal masking, remember, stories like these are what they’re referring to: https://t.co/iG5SMENmy4
When they talk about “studies” supporting masking, remember, this is what they’re referencing: 139 clients exposed to 2 symptomatic stylists with confirmed COVID-19 while both the stylists + clients wore masks, no symptomatic secondary cases were reported
@angrybklynmom @CDCMMWR The Missouri salon study on masking should make everybody dubious of anything the CDC says. A real doozy. https://t.co/mw9U5foVpu
@therealrthorat @Listen49698651 @gregggonsalves You're misrepresenting that pretty hard. A couple quick looks at the title of the report and the limitations section will set you straight. https://t.co/Cp9QhDJ9No They didn't say anything nearly as cut and