“I want to apologize for advocating for the use of masks” – Spread of respiratory illnesses not slowed down by mask use

Duane Rolheiser

Published

2 years ago

7 minute read

The study examines the effectiveness of masks and of following a hand hygiene program in reducing the likelihood of acquiring respiratory virus infections such as COVID-19.

British Health Researcher Dr. John Campbell shares the disappointing results in this presentation:

From the Cochrane Library

What did we do?
We searched for randomised controlled studies that looked at physical measures to stop people acquiring a respiratory virus infection.

We were interested in how many people in the studies caught a respiratory virus infection, and whether the physical measures had any unwanted effects.

What did we find?
We identified 78 relevant studies. They took place in low‐, middle‐, and high‐income countries worldwide: in hospitals, schools, homes, offices, childcare centres, and communities during non‐epidemic influenza periods, the global H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009, epidemic influenza seasons up to 2016, and during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We identified five ongoing, unpublished studies; two of them evaluate masks in COVID‐19. Five trials were funded by government and pharmaceutical companies, and nine trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies.

We assessed the effects of:

· medical or surgical masks;

· N95/P2 respirators (close‐fitting masks that filter the air breathed in, more commonly used by healthcare workers than the general public); and

· hand hygiene (hand‐washing and using hand sanitiser).

We obtained the following results:

Medical or surgical masks

Ten studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask in the community studies only, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu‐like illness/COVID‐like illness (9 studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 13,919 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported; discomfort was mentioned.

N95/P2 respirators

Four studies were in healthcare workers, and one small study was in the community. Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu‐like illness (5 studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people). Unwanted effects were not well‐reported; discomfort was mentioned.

Hand hygiene

Following a hand hygiene programme may reduce the number of people who catch a respiratory or flu‐like illness, or have confirmed flu, compared with people not following such a programme (19 studies; 71,210 people), although this effect was not confirmed as statistically significant reduction when ILI and laboratory‐confirmed ILI were analysed separately. Few studies measured unwanted effects; skin irritation in people using hand sanitiser was mentioned.

Dr. John Campbells presentation notes with links:

RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks.

There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers, when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.

Do physical measures such as hand-washing or wearing masks stop or slow down the spread of respiratory viruses?

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/…

Evidence published up to October 2022.

Background Influenza (H1N1) caused by the H1N1pdm09 virus in 2009

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2020.

We include results from studies from the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Main results 11 new RCTs and cluster-RCTs n = 610,872

Bringing the total number of RCTs to 78

Medical/surgical masks compared to no masks

Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness

wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness/COVID-like illness

Risk ratio (RR) 0.95, (0.84 to 1.09) 9 trials, n = 276,917 participants

Moderate-certainty evidence.

Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 RR 1.01, (CI 0.72 to 1.42)

6 trials, n = 13,919 Moderate-certainty evidence

Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported (very low-certainty evidence).

N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks

We pooled trials comparing N95/P2 respirators with medical/surgical masks

We are very uncertain on the effects of N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks on the outcome of clinical respiratory illness

Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness, or respiratory illness.

Confirmed influenza RR 0.70, (0.45 to 1.10) N = 7,779 Very low-certainty evidence

Influenza like illness N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks may be effective for ILI RR 0.82 N= 8,407 Low-certainty evidence

The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks

Probably makes little or no difference for laboratory-confirmed influenza infection RR 1.10 N = 8,407 Moderate-certainty evidence

Restricting pooling to healthcare workers made no difference to the overall findings.

Harms were poorly measured and reported

Discomfort wearing medical/surgical masks or N95/P2 respirators was mentioned in several studies

Very low-certainty evidence

One new RCT Medical/surgical masks were non-inferior to N95 respirators N = 1,009 healthcare workers in four countries, providing direct care to COVID-19 patients.

Duane Rolheiser

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

Carney Wins: What now Alberta?

Dan McTeague / 2 weeks ago

My fellow boomers, Carney’s ‘Green’ obsessions are bad for all of us!

2025 Federal Election / 3 weeks ago

Polls say Canadians will give Trump what he wants, a Carney victory.

COVID-19

Freedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich to face sentencing July 23

Published on May 12, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Freedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich is slated to be sentenced on July 23.

In a recent update by The Democracy Fund, the group noted that “Sentencing for Ms. Lich is scheduled for July 23rd and 24th before Justice Perkins-McVey in Ottawa.”

In April of this year, Lich and Chris Barber were found guilty of mischief for their roles as leaders of the 2022 protest and as social media influencers. The conviction came despite the non-violent nature of the popular movement.

TDF also noted that the full 108 page judgment of Justice Perkins-McVey’s ruling is now available online.

According to TDF, the “Court determined that both Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber were leaders of the Freedom Convoy 2022 movement and were involved in organizing and leading trucks and other vehicles from western Canada.”

“While there was no evidence that Ms. Lich owned a vehicle emitting fumes or honking, or that she blocked access to buildings, the Court noted her creation of the Freedom Convoy 2022 Facebook page, which gained a large following, and her involvement in setting up the GoFundMe and later GiveSendGo fundraising pages,” noted TDF.

As for Barber, his sentencing has been further delayed. The delay in his case follows an update he gave earlier this month in which he announced that the Crown wants to jail him for two years in addition to seizing the truck he used in the protest. As such, his legal team has asked for a stay of proceedings for the time being.

The Lich and Barber trial concluded in September of 2024, more than a year after it began. It was only originally scheduled to last 16 days.

Lich and Barber were initially arrested on February 17, 2022, meaning their legal battle has lasted longer than three years.

The actions taken by the Trudeau government were publicly supported by Mark Carney at the time, who won re-election on April 28 and is slated to form a minority government.

COVID-19

Vaccines: Assessing Canada’s COVID Response

Published on May 11, 2025

Todayville

David Clinton

I planned to be “first in line” for the shots as soon as my age cohort became eligible. By early March however, COVID itself dropped by the house, leading to the most uncomfortable (although non life-threatening) week of my life.

It’s been five years since COVID hit and one part of me wants to stuff it all in a closet somewhere and forget about it. But perhaps certain events – and especially government errors and overreach – should be documented. So this post will identify actions at all levels of government from those early days that, given our understanding of the threat available through the benefit hindsight, were both misguided and damaging.

I haven’t completely forgotten the mood through the early months in 2020. Politicians faced near-unanimous public demand for an aggressive response. Much of that sentiment was the result of messaging coming from foreign governments (mostly in the U.S.). But the local sentiment was definitely there.

Subscribe to The Audit

To be fair, Governments got some things right and, taking into account the chaos and uncertainty of those early months, even some of their mistakes were understandable. But it’s the job of government to lead. And to avoid making choices – even popular choices – that will lead to predictable harms.

Vaccine mandates starting in 2021 were a case in point. Federal authority largely stemmed from the 2005 Quarantine Act and the Contraventions Act that allowed officials to issue tickets for non-compliance with the Quarantine Act. Provincial mandates were based on laws like Ontario’s Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. The question isn’t whether the mandates and their enforcement were legal, but whether they caused more harm than good.

As the first vaccines started arriving in Canada around February 2021, I planned to be “first in line” for the shots as soon as my age cohort became eligible. By early March however, COVID itself dropped by the house, leading to the most uncomfortable (although non life-threatening) week of my life.

After recovering, my family doctor advised me to wait three months before getting the shots so my body could get back to normal. During those months, I got access to preprint results from the Israeli study into natural immunity which showed that:

Natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity

Those results were later confirmed by CDC and NEJM studies, among others.

Given that context, I didn’t see any justification for exposing myself to even minimal health risks associated with vaccines. Which meant that, despite demonstrably posing no threat to public health, I would (at various times) be unable to:

Board domestic commercial flights, VIA Rail, Rocky Mountaineer trains, and cruise ships within Canada
Board international flights or trains departing Canada
Freely return to Canada through an overland point of entry
Upon return to Canada, bypass the 14 day quarantine under the Quarantine Act
Upon return to Canada via air, bypass the three day quarantine in (expensive) government-approved hotels
Engage in ‘non-essential” activities like restaurants, gyms, events (details varied from province to province)
Enter Parliament
Seek employment in federally regulated air, rail, and marine sectors

What should Canadian governments have done? Remove restrictions on individuals with natural immunity, obviously. Which, by the way, would have come with the valuable bonus of entirely avoiding the truckers protest and consequent confrontations.

If authorities were reluctant to take us at our word on immunity, they could have followed the European Union’s lead by emulating their Digital COVID Certificate for proof of recovery. Were they worried about people without immunity creating fake certificates? Hard to take that one seriously. There were more fake vaccine passports littering the streets of Ontario than abandoned Toronto Maple Leafs car window flags in a normal early May.

In the end, my own suffering was negligible. I didn’t really want to visit family in the U.S. all that much anyway. But for millions of other Canadians, the real-world stakes were far higher. And all that’s besides the billions of dollars wasted during those years’ government policies.

To be sure, resisting unscientific street-level calls for vaccine mandates would have required courage. But shouldn’t acts of courage be a source of pride for public officials?

Subscribe to The Audit.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.