Can't stop long… there's the garden and a million things to do. Including finish the draft of my book!
But good comments about math in the last post. I will probably put my own math thoughts directly into the book. The main point will be that teaching children math is not as complicated as you think. As always, I try to give you criteria and an overview of the goals rather than minutiae, which I think are readily available elsewhere.
Numbers
The goal for the young child (before about 6th grade) is to arrive at full facility with operations.
To get there, he needs to know numbers.
This knowledge begins intuitively and can be conveyed (and elicited) by conversations and shared observations. “You give me those two and I will give you these three.” “You have ten; why don't you give half to your brother.” “This flower has four petals; this one has five.” “Let's fold this tissue paper so it has twelve points.”
Threeness and eightness and elevenness must be encountered and internalized. It seems to be built into human nature to “get” the numbers between one and five (interestingly, not zero). After that, things become a bit hazy.
We adults take this grasp of number for granted, but it does take time. Intuition needs a boost from outside, especially as the child goes beyond the number five. Seeing larger numbers in groups made up of one, two, three, four, and five helps. Your child needs to relate to numbers on a visceral level before he can tackle operations.
A child needs to learn numbers and their operations the way he learns to ride a bike — without thinking about it. He just must. If you are having trouble with your 7th grader, it's because he doesn't ride the math bike, he wobbles and is afraid of falling. There is no remedy but to stop everything and get those facts down.
But I need to tell you something: There are a lot of ways to skin this cat. One way is drills. Another is games. To this day, I divide a pot of tomato seedlings or count the up to seven eggs I get from my hens the way I divided jacks as a fifth grader, when I was crouching out on the school porch with my best friends (our school had wide wooden porches where we could play on a rainy or hot day). That is, in groups of three and four, or what have you. (Did you play jacks? It's a game that has it all for internalizing number groups that add to ten, while developing fine motor skills and hand-eye coordination.)
Operations
If your third grader plays Parcheesi all day (a deadly boring game, come to find out as an adult; it's really just good for facility with numbers up to twelve, so get another child to play with him), then you're good. Done and done. And of course there is a veritable panoply of creative and enchanting math games out there. A simple online search will yield a surfeit.
I once overcame one child's subtraction resistance by assigning an older child to play blackjack with him for a week in lieu of his usual math lesson (but not hers, poor thing). Problem solved. Truly — he went from answering the question of what 12 – 8 equals with “zero” — so vexing! why must they torture us this way — to complete facility with addition and subtraction. Assigning a card game seemed preferable to tossing him out a handy window.
There is no reason to shed any tears over this process; but the process must be undergone. If your child is “hating” math and you are dragging him kicking and screaming every day, stop everything and just give him games to play that require him to add and subtract, and later to multiply and divide. TRUST ME. It's all about knowing. the. facts. Who cares how you get there. If calculating batting averages teaches your son how to find the average, why spend a lot of money on a curriculum for that purpose?
Algebra
The older child, having mastered the facts and operations (which lead up to short division aka fractions, which enables him to work easily with converting units later in algebra, especially in chemistry), must do algebra.
This brings up the eternal Saxon question. Saxon was developed for a specific purpose: To help children not lose skills ahead of the SAT. By rotating through the skills as they build incrementally, this is achieved, not necessarily in the most elegant way. (Saxon is not good for the earlier, pre-6th-grade stage, which demands repetition, not rotation. Once you can subtract, you can subtract. I really advise you to use an older “lesson and drill” type text as the foundation of your curriculum.) Without a dedicated math teacher for algebra, Saxon will work. It's not the greatest, but it will do, especially if you take it lightly and add Kahn Academy.
Algebra is the logic of mathematics, akin to expressing thoughts in language. (If you do the two subjects together, language grammar including sentence diagramming and algebra, your child's mind will be patterned to think about things systematically instead of only intuitively.)
The older, more traditional textbooks are better, though. When I was a girl, you did the “odds” and often skipped the A and B sections of the problem set entirely (maybe a few at the end to be sure), going straight to the C, if you were able to do the examples and warm-ups perfectly. The answers were in the back of the book and you just plowed ahead if you could. The tests were the proof that you learned the lesson. Many teachers only collected tests, but went through the lessons the day after they were done.
Geometry
The final piece of math education in secondary school is geometry. If possible, the child should be introduced to Euclid. Yes, working through his Propositions would be ideal. However, an older textbook that systematically takes the student through the theorems and requires proofs will do*. Something along these lines is essential, and the Saxon method of throwing occasional geometry problems in the mix cannot substitute for a concentrated year spent delving into axioms, propositions, and proofs.
*Before I had said “Jacobs” as the text, but I think I am remembering the one I had in high school incorrectly. The one we used was this one, I'm pretty sure: Jurgensen's Geometry (affiliate link). You want an older version (read the reviews to understand the reason for this).
Everyone says they want their children to do what they call “Critical Thinking,” but they start at the wrong end. I cringe when I hear it. They let children meander all over in elementary school and then expect them to get a crash course as a senior.
It's fashionable in such curricula to offer some current opinion and then have the students work through it critically, but how are they supposed to do that? You need a foundation, especially in knowing when you have or have not proven something. And for that you need Euclid. Which means you need everything that came before… like I said.
Geometry is visual algebra, algebra requires math facts. See how it builds up?
Calculus is a language for science. It's not a sort of “bigger abstract mental hurdle” for someone who has gotten through the other subjects, to be done apart from its object, which is science (physics). I encourage you to read Arthur Robinson to understand this if you don't get it.
The main point, though, is that your job as a homeschooler is to guide your child through math facts to algebra and geometry. The rest he can do later if he needs it for the science he is interested in.
It's doable, so don't worry
Somewhere John Taylor Gatto says that the student can learn a particular skill he needs in six weeks. If you were paying attention in school, you will remember that the first 6 weeks of every year were spent in review, and the last 6 weeks were spent making sure everyone was up to speed. We never got to the end of any textbook!
If your child suddenly realizes he needs to go to engineering school, he can find out their requirements and remedy any gaps or lacks — and he'll have the motivation to do it, unlike when he's moping around in your kitchen not getting why you force him to do math. So don't worry.
Really: I have one child who told me in 8th grade that he didn't want to do any more math (having completed his second algebra year). I agreed. Subsequently, he learned calculus in a high school physics class. Another son vowed never to take another math class after high school; naturally he studied calculus in college. It's not all up to you! Just give them the tools to learn and they will do the rest.
bits & pieces
- I don't know if I've ever shared this article before. It concerns the philosophy behind David Clayton's establishment of The Way of Beauty at Thomas More College. His ideas will be fruitful for anyone contemplating a life of learning. The article begins on p. 16 of the PDF.
- David Warren on the misguided tendency to appease. What he says expresses my attitude exactly. Here on the blog I am focused on helping you establish your peaceful corner of life and love. Some are surprised and shocked even when they check in with me elsewhere (Facebook and Twitter) and find that I, as Warren recommends, pull no punches. I just want to say that there is a way to live that is both committed to beauty and uncompromising in opposition to evil. Softness in one's positive life does not require softness in one's dealings with aggressors. That is my apologia in a nutshell: that I am attempting it.
- If you have never read Vaclav Havel's speech The Power of the Powerless, please, I beg you, read it now. It's not long. Please invite your friends over (you can sit on the deck) and read it with them and discuss it. And then you will understand, at least, why I don't put on a happy face when confronted with ideology and why I won't post a black square or a gay rainbow, not even to be nice, not even to show how much I love my fellow man.
- I talked about family life with some friendly folks at Great & Main: have a listen! The topic was the heroic meaning of parenthood.
- Pentecost is a glorious season — are you looking for a lovely and contemplative activity for your children? Our friends at Liturgy of the Home have made another liturgical calendar. Do check it out.
- My friend Peter Kwasniewski writes about St. Paul's prescription in the first letter to the Corinthians for liturgical renewal.
- I am looking forward to seeing what Sally Thomas does with her new blog, Abandon Hopefully. (Make sure you read all the way down to the explanation of the name!) Years ago I wanted to post her essay on Swallows and Amazons, Not Duffers, Won't Drown, here, but it was behind a paywall at that time. I even wrote to First Things to point out to them the benefits to their publication for allowing access through this blog, to no avail! But later I was able to do it. Just my kind of thing.
- Architecture and Russell Kirk: Servitude and Boredom. I would add: something has to be done about building codes.
from the archives
- Summer in the homeschool (spoiler: enjoy your summer! An old-fashioned summer is a treasure trove of memory)
liturgical year
follow us everywhere!
Stay abreast of the posts when they happen:
I just share pretty pictures: Auntie Leila’s Instagram.
If you want politics, rants, and takes on what is going on in the Church:
Auntie Leila’s Facebook (you can just follow — my posts are public — sometimes I share articles here that don’t make it into {bits & pieces})
The boards of the others: Rosie’s Pinterest. Sukie’s Pinterest. Deirdre’s Pinterest. Habou’s Pinterest. Bridget’s Pinterest.
And the others on IG: Rosie’s Instagram. Sukie’s Instagram. Deirdre’s Instagram. Bridget’s Instagram.Habou’s Instagram.
Jules says
Only math related if you calculate the time saved by properly caring for plants: are this raspberries in the first picture? I’m always seeking inspiration for ways to cut down on the weeds that choke my berries
Leila says
Yes, Jules, raspberries! I pile them with woodchips and whatever mulch is available. I usually weed the row; this year I am pressed for time and pulling out the intractable grasses but leaving the ground ivy on the theory that it is low and acts as a ground cover. I need to fill in some gaps in the row with new raspberry plants for sure.
Liz says
Leila, I used cribbage to help my son learn addition facts ( the textbook and flash cards having not really worked well. That is the kid who was soon a year ahead in math, declared geometric proofs intuitively obvious when he began his Bob Jones geometry book and breezed through calculus in the non-graohing calculator sections with A’s. Just because the beginning is rocky doesn’t mean the end will be. My daughter is currently loving The Life of Fred math program with her kids. Kahn Academy didn’t work well with her oldest.
Mary Ann Hogan Bernard says
Your mention of batting averages made me smile. My brother frequently had to repeat math in summer school when he was a middle schooler. The sister, who was also a NY Yankees fan, retaught him everything in baseball terms. Done.
Leila says
Mary Ann, a super common story! Why do we torture boys…
Catherine says
When I use cookies my kids get their math. What is 5-2? Blank stare. If you have 5 cookies and you eat 2, how many do you have left? Happy face, 3! For addition, you have 3 and ,nice mama that I am I gave you 4…
Also cooking helps with fractions…
Emily says
Seriously, for math.
DRILLS.
At my school–for some reason I do not know–we did not do drills with adding and subtraction. We DID with multiplication. So I know my multiplication facts easily–but even as an adult, I do not know my addition and subtraction with that same ease! (Except for adding nines.) WHY my teachers did not do this in first and second grade is beyond me! And things like percentages….not really done.
My dad, who was a math major, always hated the way schools taught math. He would applaud this approach, Auntie Leila!
Kristi says
Yes to all of this! Thanks, Leila, I’m going to share this with the families in my homeschool co-op math class.
I see someone else already seconded learning math through baseball stats. Our story — I gave up teaching my son math in the middle of his 3rd grade year. Math triggered his perfectionism and drove us both crazy. I tried 4 different curricula that year before conceding that the problem wasn’t the curriculum.
Around that time he got into figuring out baseball statistics. Thank God my husband told me not to worry that my son was spending so much time with baseball cards! But we had no idea how much math he was learning until that summer, at a minor league game, our son mentioned what a batter’s BA changed to when he struck out.
Fall of 4th grade, we joined a hybrid homeschool program where he took Saxon 54 and aced it. He already understood division, decimals, fractions, etc. The important thing — he learned that he loves math.
Mignon says
That piece by Sally Thomas on Swallows and Amazons was terrific! Thank you so much, also, for letting us know of her website. I knew of her through the Mater Amabilis FB page that she moderates, and I’m delighted to find out now that she has this website!
BridgetAnn says
Good to know about “the older, more traditional textbooks” for math. I was not homeschooled nor classically trained in grammar school but my math education was very good and helped with the mechanics when I went on to study the Great Books. Maybe I can get ahold of my grammar school and ask what they used….
Great old-fashioned summer post! Question: I’ve been teaching my 6 1/2 year-old to read this past year. He still has a long way to go. I have been trying to do 10 minutes/day about 3 days a week so he doesn’t lose it completely. Should I just let it go and pick it up again when we start our homeschool again next term? We do a lot of read-alouds…
Leila says
BridgetAnn, just leave it. A little boy needs a certain overall development before he can read fluently (read the Moores’ Better Late Than Early to understand the details). Spending the summer running, jumping, and swimming will do more for his reading ability than “working” on reading.
If you do absolutely nothing to teach him to read this summer, he will be just as ready to learn to read, if not more ready, than if you continue the lessons — but you will both be happier!
And he may come to you with something he *wants* to read… or more productively, that he wants to *write*. Trying to write something (a message to a friend for instance) is how many learn to put their phonics into practice. You just have to have a VERY light touch, handing him a lot of the answers he’s looking for on spelling things, or he’ll stop asking you.
BridgetAnn says
Ahh, thank you for the permission 🙂 Is it obvious that he’s my oldest? Haha. He loves being read to and will sit for really long read alouds but learning to read is really not fun for him. We are definitely a “go outside/ play pretend type family”, I just wasn’t sure if the mechanics would be completely lost if we stopped over the summer. What you said makes sense to me & I will look into the book you referenced. Thanks for the guidance!
appleava says
Math games can be fun if you’re kids really feel like it’s a game and not an educational exercise – so, basically, if you offer a book or something special as a reward. : D There’s always “Ten Items or Less” at the grocery store, or handing them number scavenger hunt sheets (you have to find something 12 of something, 8 of something, etc…), etc… I saw someone already mentioned yahtzee. : D I’ll have to look up parcheesi; the only thing I know about it is that it’s the name of a game. : ) Picture books about counting, time telling and so on from the library (10 Items or Less (where I got the game idea), Feast for 10, The Clock Struck One, The M&Ms counting book, etc.) have also been of interest here.
appleava says
*your
Lisa G. says
Wow, that Gatto piece was fabulous.
Iris says
Thank you, thank you, thank you for the links to Vaclav Havel and David Warren. Very relevant now.
Kelsey Beason says
So far my google searches have not yielded any worthwhile ideas for games using multiplication and/or division. All I can come up with is Yahtzee. Anyone else have any ideas?
appleava says
As goes the concept of division, the picture book “The Doorbell Rang” might help?
Kristi says
My kids (and I) love this game, which uses multiplication. It’s like Blokus in strategy. We use 10- or 12-sided dice. https://www.multiplication.com/our-blog/jen-wieber/dice-game-teaching-area-and-perimeter
Elizabeth says
I’m a math teacher (in the regular classroom), but I wanted to chime in with a few resources that I love and would use as a homeschooling parent.
https://talkingmathwithkids.com/ Read a few posts on this site and check out his books. Great for inspiration on how to see how to naturally support a child’s innate mathematical curiosity.
https://teacher.desmos.com/ Desmos is a free, on-line graphing calculator. The teacher site has amazing resources for upper elementary and up. It’s all free; just make an account as a teacher. Some of the activities are better suited towards a classroom with many students.
And I will add that mathematics is essentially the study of patterns.
The facts are important. Noticing and wondering about the patterns of numbers is also important! And that is where you can learn to appreciate the beauty of math.
Leila says
Patterns, yes! For instance, a “hundred chart” is a wonderful learning opportunity. Let your child take his time with it, coloring it, decorating it, just looking at it…
Luana says
I would appreciate help and advice what to do with a child struggling to “get” math concepts. One of my children (9 years old) is learning and re-learning the same concepts over and over (for example subtraction, division and reading clock) and she understands what it is about, but cannot seem to really grasp how it works and why it works this way. We come to the point where it all seems to work, she seems to understand and – few days later I realize that there are still huge gaps there.
She is otherwise fast learner, very good reader, good in foreign languages, music, learning instruments, learning about nature, sports.. everything works wonderful, but math?
I don`t understand why and I feel like I fail her.
We work with concrete materials – and there she really understands. But next step to abstraction doesn`t really work, or works for short time periods.
I am very grateful for help and advice. Thank you!
She is still young, but it does make me nervous that from month to month we are more and more behind, instead catching up.
Should I work with her on only on number sense for numbers 1-20 till that is really really 100% clear for her? And let everything else go?
Leila M. Lawler says
Luana, yes! There is a reason that I don’t go into various curricula or tips in this post. I’m trying to get across what the goals are. Your daughter is highly intelligent but she has not yet KNOWN the numbers. So she has to do things that help her to internalize them.
This summer, see if you can enlist another child to play simple, very simple, games with her that involve rolling two dice and going backwards and forwards on a board. Teach her blackjack and other card games. A child that age doesn’t really have a reason to know what time it is, but perhaps having an analog clock in her room (not one that is lit up, so she can sleep) can help her. You can have her do certain things at certain times by that clock.
However, also don’t worry about it. Her mind is on other things and often those other things have to be mastered before the child can attend to what is on YOUR mind.
CJ says
This post was providential. I haven’t read your blog in forever, and here I open it up as we’re struggling with… math! We homeschooled up until this school year, and well, now we’re homeschooling again alongside everyone else, but under the auspices of the school system. Our grade 3 son gets video lessons with his classroom teacher, and they’re teaching multiplication and division. What a complete joke how it’s taught! My son understood multiplication and division a long time ago, and I’ve drilled him for the past few weeks in prep for this set of lessons. But the method they’re teaching is so darn convoluted! My son is very good at math (as is everyone in our house – I love math and my husband works in an engineering-related field, plus we have overloaded book shelves full of board/card/dice games we play relentlessly), but he was left confused and frustrated. I told him to forget it and just to do what I’ve taught him all along. I’ll get him to do the problems in the booklet using the sane, normal way of doing math, and skip the rest of the video lessons.
Very thankful the school year is being cut short and finishing this Friday (instead of until June 29th like it usually is), as we’ll get some breathing space. We’re still going to “do school” for a 1/2-1 hour a day through the summer to work on reading and writing as he struggles with it and I finally feel like we’ve got some momentum (and as long as he’s agreeable – my other kids all have things they’re like to work on, so I’m going with it), but I’m using old homeschooling materials I’ve held onto or just ordered back in April when it became clear we’d be doing this awhile and what the school sent home was wholly inadequate.
So, now here I am, wondering what I’m supposed to do in the fall… do I send my kids back to school (it’s a Catholic school, but is also publically-funded and part of the secular school system here and teaches provincial curriculum), or do I resume homeschooling? My tween daughter is struggling with the social isolation right now, and wants to return to school, but that’s really the only reason I have to send any of them back at this point. But once we’re out of the school, we’re out – we won’t be able to get back in as it’s a school-of-choice and there likely won’t be space again for everyone like there was this year. So many prayers and decisions!
Amanda says
I deleted my Ravelry account because of their vehement stance against free speech, harassment of people who didn’t agree with their political/ideological views, and their in-your-face support of the LGBT agenda. I won’t post black squares (or cubes… some might say) on social media and I don’t care if my “silence” offends people. I am curious to read your views on wearing a mask. I have read many medical studies as well as current statistics relating to transmission of viruses. We refuse to wear masks in our family and every week at Mass there is mention of wearing them as “a courtesy to others”. I don’t believe it is a courtesy, for many reasons, to wear a mask. It would seem, to me, to be requiring people to be complicit in a massive deception to request that they wear a mask. It reminds me of the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. I feel like the kid in the story who plainly sees that the emperor is naked and doesn’t understand why everyone is pretending he isn’t.
CJ says
For masks, the principle is simple – they reduce the spread of droplets that contain the virus. All corona viruses spread primarily via droplets of some form, so the less droplets that are around, the less chance of it spreading. It doesn’t protect you as much as it protects those around you (although *some* evidence suggests it will also help you – just not as much). It doesn’t make you invincible by any stretch of the imagination, but it can help slow the spread if that’s your goal.
It was incredibly stupid to not recommend it from the get-go, as we already knew they were effective in slowing the spread of other droplet-based viruses. The flip-flop just added confusion to an already bewildering bombardment of information, rules, protocols and advice.
I personally don’t see the big deal – medical professionals, doctors, dentists, etc around here have been wearing them for years as an infection control step when doing certain procedures. There’s lots about this virus we don’t understand yet, and I’m okay with being a little over-cautious in the short term. I’m an at-risk person due to my pre-existing health conditions, as well as my disabled daughter. This virus does crazy things to the vascular system in some people (in a lot of people, as it turns out, which is why there’s such a wide range of unusual symptoms), and some other people get it without ever knowing they were sick.
So yeah, I appreciate people wearing masks as a courtesy, and I wear one as a courtesy to them in case I am sick and don’t know it yet. Pre-symptomatic transmission happens (which also happens with other corona viruses, again it was stupid that they assumed it wouldn’t happen until they had firm evidence to the contrary). There was a workplace in my town that had that happen – a sick employee infected at least 10 others in his cohort of 12 employees 48 hours before he showed symptoms – worked Friday, had the weekend off and started showing symptoms on Monday. The employer was smart enough to group employees in cohorts, which contained it to just that one group and not spread to the other 50 employees. There’s only been 15 identified cases in our area, of which 10 was from that group, so it’s probable it all came from the single pre-symptomatic employee.
I don’t venture out of my house very often – about once every 2 weeks for groceries and to do my kids’ homework exchange and any other errands – and every time I see more and more people wearing masks. It makes me glad that they care enough about the people around them to do so.
Leila says
Well, the problem is conflating the masks worn by professionals and the ones worn by the general population. And dong something as a courtesy is fine, until it becomes counterproductive — harming the person by having him breathe in his own germs and CO2, or making it so he touches his face a lot.
People need to be courteous, but courtesy isn’t something that can be leveraged infinitely or indefinitely against normal life. And it’s not actually one group’s right to decide what is courteous without reference to courtesy owed to others! Maybe it’s time to say that it’s courteous NOT to demand that everyone wear a mask at all times. Maybe it’s too much.
Some might say it’s not too much, but then it’s on them to say WHEN it will be too much. Surely we don’t expect people to wear masks… forever? I don’t want to live that way.
The issue of asymptomatic transmission is now very much under question now — I don’t think you can assert it as a fact.
It actually doesn’t make sense to wear masks outside or during exercise, and it doesn’t make sense to have healthy people wear them as a general rule where people are spread out. I don’t live in Japan or Hong Kong — I live where people normally do stay far apart from each other.
But there are costs and risks to wearing masks long-term, including the hidden cost for children. When I hear people making plans for mask-wearing at school in the Fall, I wonder if they have understood what this would mean for children. There is something inhumane about it, and according to available research, which seems pretty clear on the extremely low risk for children, not at all protective against the virus.
Amanda says
Thank you so much for the reply, very well said!
Janet says
This is the best concise advice on teaching math I have ever seen!
The Covid comments/mask stuff made me very sad. Maybe no one will ever read this, or perhaps it won’t even get posted, but here goes.
As Christians, we are required to protect the weak. We are required to love our neighbors as ourselves. If I deliberately do anything that puts my neighbor at risk of death I am violating the fifth commandment. Similarly, if I neglect basic safety precautions and put my neighbor at risk, the effect is equivalent. This is really not controversial; if I leave poison out unsecured and a neighborhood child gets into it and becomes gravely ill, can I justify my actions by saying it’s an individual choice? How about if I leave out it where it might could contaminate someone else’s food or drink without them even being aware?
I’m not afraid of dying myself (of course if a run-away truck is bearing down on me, I would jump and be terrified, but that’s biology) but of causing someone else grave harm. So I wear a mask whenever I am likely to come within 30 feet of anyone outside my household.
Covid is spread by aerosols. This is no longer in doubt. Here is a peer reviewed article from the National Academy of Sciences. It was funded by the Welch Foundation. https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/06/10/2009637117.
Aerosols and droplets can be projected over 30 feet by a sneeze and can create a 30 ft. slipstream behind a jogger. Within a few hours they can be distributed entirely throughout an enclosed space, so 6 ft. distancing means very little. Does anyone really think that the over seven million confirmed cases in the U.S. were caused by people who didn’t know enough to wash their hands and keep 6 feet apart? If everyone wore a mask in public for a month, transmission rates would drop below 1 and the epidemic would die out. This has happened in other countries.Here is one article among many explaining this concept: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says. Covid is most infectious in the few days BEFORE symptoms appear, so it is vital for people who do not have symptoms to wear a mask anyway.
I get the lack of trust: We have been lied to by China, the WHO, the CDC and a whole alphabet soup of government agencies for 10 weeks when they claimed that only sick people and medical professionals would benefit from wearing masks (and also that Covid only spreads from close personal contact with people who have symptoms), so I get the distrust. It was a deliberate and admitted lie calculated to preserve the inadequate supply of masks. so we are really on our own. It’s too bad that mask wearing didn’t start in February; it’s really rather cozy in cold weather, but admittedly uncomfortable when it’s hot. I was lucky because I already had a supply of masks I used for particularly dusty or moldy house and garden tasks, so I started wearing them early. A nice by-product is that for the first time ever, I have NO seasonal allergies or stuffy nose. I did feel a bit self-conscious at first, but one gets over that. Likewise the discomfort–after a while it just fades into the background.
Here is another perspective from a Lutheran who was a missionary:https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/13/christianity-epidemics-2000-years-should-i-still-go-to-church-coronavirus/
“The Christian motive for hygiene and sanitation does not arise in self-preservation but in an ethic of service to our neighbor. We wish to care for the afflicted, which first and foremost means not infecting the healthy. Early Christians created the first hospitals in Europe as hygienic places to provide care during times of plague, on the understanding that negligence that spread disease further was, in fact, murder.”
If you insist on going to church without a mask, others might assume you are also lax about other safety precautions, and they are forced to balance desire to be there against the risk that they may carry an infection to a vulnerable household member–at the very least distracting them from their devotions. Please don’t put anyone in that position just to show your political affiliation or for minor personal comfort. (Hey I find most clothes uncomfortable in hot weather, but I don’t go out in public in my nightie and bare feet.) As it states in the Baltimore Catechism, God sometimes grants miracles, but only after we have exhausted all natural means.
Unlike economic shutdowns, which are legitimately controversial, mask wearing does not endanger anyone’s livelihood.It is not an “Asian thing” either–mask wearing was introduced into China early in the 20th century by a western trained physician during an anthrax epidemic that he correctly surmised was airborne and was able to control only when mask wearing became widespread. Mask wearing in Asian countries was considered a sign of a modern, scientific, Western/European outlook. go figure. I just don’t get why it should be a point of contention.
Re chicken pox parties: those were a thing a generation ago, but not that widespread. However, no one EVER had measles parties or polio parties because the risk from the disease was too great to allow if there was still any chance of avoiding it.BTW polio killed far fewer people than Covid and only left 1 in 1000 with permanent disability. Yet schools definitely shut down during polio epidemics and during other epidemics also. Covid can leave survivors with permanent lung, kidney, and heart injuries, and there’s a lot we still don’t know.
Schools are a real problem–we can’t even get kids to stop sticking used chewing gum under their desks or making out in the locker areas. But LGBT month, active shooter drills, comprehensive k-12 sex ed, stranger-danger “your daddy might be a child molester” training, history that disparages and ignores Christianity and the Western tradition–all those are far more traumatizing. We can’t live our lives worrying about what might not work in public schools.
BTW very small children should not wear masks, but they should be mostly staying home anyway, even without Covid, as most readers of this blog will agree.
Leila says
Janet, please, instead of being “sad,” just assume that everyone has had just as much time as you have had (a lot!) to read up and assess the latest thinking on how Covid is spread and indeed what the risks RIGHT NOW are. Also, please assume that everyone is just as committed to loving their neighbor as you are.
That way, we can have a discussion.
Amanda says
Yes, thank you. I really did not ask for anyone else’s opinion on this subject except for the blog author’s as I was merely curious. But, since others seem to want to discuss it I will say this: I have spent hours and hours going over studies and medical literature. I can link some if you wish but, really, all of us are able to do this research on our own. I am also a Registered Nurse. The thing is, you have to actually READ the studies. From the medical journals, or the NIH website, or other scientific resources. You can’t just read the headlines and assume you know what the studies actually say. You can’t just read the CDC website and gain any real knowledge about what the studies actually show. You have to read studies on both sides of the issue (both for and against wearing a mask) and then you have to read the information and studies you can find on the possible harms from wearing a mask. Don’t just look for information that confirms your bias but read the opposing literature as well. You also need to read the data we have about who has actually and certainly died from this virus vs how prevalent infection has been in the population (and, yes, they have been recording deaths as COVID deaths when people died from something else entirely, but tested positive, or WORSE, were only “suspected” to have the virus.) And, then, you come to your own conclusion. Not only that, you should respect another person’s perspective/decision making process. I would never assume the worst of or shame a person for wearing a mask (just like I would never shame a person for wearing a mini skirt and halter top to mass, even if I thought it was disrespectful and immodest to do so) even if I thought it was doing them personal harm. I respect that they are capable of making their own decisions based on the information they have and what makes them comfortable/less fearful. And, yes, let us just assume that we are all committed to loving our neighbor as best we can.
Scientific studies aside, seeing people walking around wearing masks is frightening and anxiety producing on a subconscious level. It signals that something is not right here, something is not normal, there is something to be afraid of so we need to protect ourselves and possibly other people. I see this especially in children, my own and others. It is actually rather damaging to them to see people being forced to wear something covering their faces. It is the same for adults, we are just better able to rationalize it away but we still take in the fear and anxiety, even if we do not acknowledge it.
Leila says
Amanda, I agree, especially with your last paragraph. Every action has risks, physical and psychological, and its unintended consequences. We can’t refrain from discussing this.
Janet says
Amanda,
Please post the links to the articles that demonstrate that widespread mask wearing by the public does NOT reduce the spread of corona viruses or puts the general public at greater risk in some way. Maybe I’m missing something, but I went back and spent way too much time looking through PubMed this weekend just to make sure and still couldn’t find any such articles. (I used to work in a major research library, so I generally understand how to look things up and read articles beyond the abstract.) Hey, I would be glad to go to public places and ditch the mask if you have convincing evidence that it doesn’t help anyone, so please post the links.
I did see two other categories of articles that might be only somewhat related:
First, there were indeed statements published early in the epidemic (but not peer reviewed empirical research) speculating that wearing masks might make people feel so safe that they would ignore hand hygiene and social distancing or that they might touch their faces even more. Perhaps you were thinking of these. (Note the embedded assumption that mask wearing makes people feel safe!- one of your objections is that masks scare people) Obviously social distancing and hand washing are also necessary and people need to be reminded not to touch the outside of their masks and then touch their faces –something that becomes easier after some practice and if the mask fits properly to begin with. But even if I forget and touch my own mask and face, while I risk contaminating myself, I am still reducing the spread of virus containing aerosols and thus helping to protect other people. The main stated justification for telling people not to wear masks was always to preserve the very limited supply of medical grade masks for use by health care workers.
Secondly, there are indeed some people who should not wear a mask (severe respiratory diseases, unconscious, etc., etc…), and it might be possible find a few articles listing and discussing these categories. The unfortunate people whose health is so fragile that wearing a surgical mask for an hour while they are out puts them in real danger should be sure to rigorously self isolate to keep themselves as safe as possible because they are at far greater risk from Covid 19 than the rest of us.–But if you’re healthy enough to be out in public, you’re healthy enough to wear a mask. People who fall into the “so fragile that wearing a mask might cause harm” category call need to the doctor’s office or emergency room for advice about what precautions to take if they need to come in in order to protect both themselves and health care workers. Just saying–I don’t think this is likely you or anyone you care for.
Amanda says
Janet,
Respectfully, it seems to me that you are not actually interested in any evidence I may have to present to you. I suspect you have been convinced that your opinion (which you are most certainly entitled to) is the correct stance and that my opinion is incorrect. I, therefore, see little point in pursuing this conversation with you. However, in spite of the fruitlessness of this conversation, I will do my best over the next several days to go back and cite the some of the research I have found that led me to the conclusion that wearing a mask is not very helpful and might even pose more health risk to the wearer. I have to do this during my limited free time so it might come in bits and pieces if you can bear with me. Here is one article with a couple quotes for now:
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342
“Discussion: Neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS–CoV-2 during coughs by infected patients.” However, the size and concentrations of SARS–CoV-2 in aerosols generated during coughing are unknown. Oberg and Brousseau (3) demonstrated that surgical masks did not exhibit adequate filter performance against aerosols measuring 0.9, 2.0, and 3.1 μm in diameter. Lee and colleagues (4) showed that particles 0.04 to 0.2 μm can penetrate surgical masks. The size of the SARS–CoV particle from the 2002–2004 outbreak was estimated as 0.08 to 0.14 μm (5); assuming that SARS-CoV-2 has a similar size, surgical masks are unlikely to effectively filter this virus.”
And before you jump on me about the study being retracted, it was retracted because:
“We had not fully recognized the concept of limit of detection (LOD) of the in-house reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction used in the study (2.63 log copies/mL), and we regret our failure to express the values below LOD as “<LOD (value).” The LOD is a statistical measure of the lowest quantity of the analyte that can be distinguished from the absence of that analyte. Therefore, values below the LOD are unreliable and our findings are uninterpretable. Reader comments raised this issue after publication. We proposed correcting the reported data with new experimental data from additional patients, but the editors requested retraction."
This does not negate the data they found. In fact it further proves the point. If all of the samples (coughing into a petri dish with no mask, with a surgical mask, and a cloth mask) they collected had levels that were below the level of detection then coughing with or with out a mask on produced virus samples that were BELOW the level of detection. It also does not affect the results of the swabs from the masks which found that they all had the virus present on the outside of the mask. When people put on and take off their masks which part are they touching? The outside. Does anyone wash their hands each time they take off or put on their mask. No. So they are touching a contaminated surface with their hands and not washing them and then touching everything in the environment around them.
As I said, I will present further evidence as I go back and find it, as I have time to do so.
Cordially,
Amanda
Janet says
Here is the paper Amanda referenced to support her unwillingness to wear a mask.
[https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342].
Please, please, please, just wear a mask in public.
This retracted paper is based on only FOUR patients, coughing at a distance of 8 inches. Following Amanda’s advice, I looked at the actual paper and data, rather than just the abstract or conclusion. The conclusions of this author are exactly opposite what his own data show! Patients 1 and 3 showed NO virus transmission when coughing through a cotton mask. Patient 1 showed a 95% reduction and patient 4 showed a 92% reduction. [I showed the math at the bottom of this comment.]
Only patient 1 had an initial maskless result above the lower limits of detection and all results with masks were below the LOD (all were lower than the unmasked cough), so you can’t read all that much into the reduction, although it is suggestive. A conclusion opposite the data is a huge red flag. Surface contamination on the outside of all four masks was also below the lower limits of detection, and so also meaningless, although I agree with Amanda that good hand hygiene is always a good idea anyway. Surface contamination was reported as log copies/ml. Ml is a measure of volume. The author does not explain how he measured and calculated the volume of a surface–makes no sense.
If anyone cares to read through the comment sections to the article, a number of researchers have pointed out additional major errors in the methodology which makes the data pretty much meaningless, including swabs on the outside of the masks, so I won’t go through them now. The whole thing looks like a middle school science project, except with a deadly pathogen and human subjects. References to it have been spreading around the right wing echo-chamber.
Please, please, please just wear a mask when you’re in public everyone.
The only possibly actual conclusion from this study: masks cannot guarantee 100% blockage of virus during a cough. Well, duh!! No one ever claimed that. Other take-aways: It’s probably not a good idea to put your face 8 inches away from a person with confirmed Covid who is coughing, even if that person is wearing a mask. Duh again. Also, don’t touch other people’s masks, and wash your hands when you don and doff or touch your own mask which might be contaminated on the outside with the germs you already have. Wash your hands so you don’t contaminate other surfaces and unwittingly spread the virus. We knew that. Also, in general, wash your hands and don’t touch your face or your child’s face unless you was hands first. Any surface might be contaminated. I can live with that–I can be vigilant about hand hygiene because of potentially contaminated surfaces, but I cannot alone stop breathing potentially contaminated air. We wear a mask to reduce airborne transmission. More research is needed–isn’t that the conclusion of every medical paper ever published?
The paper does not address the question of whether universal masking reduces airborne virus transmission from asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic people at a distance of 6 feet, which is what the recommendation for universal mask wearing is about.
*************************************************************************************************************************
Here’s the math for patient 1. Data is reported on logarithmic scale. Without mask: 3.53, with cotton mask: 2.27
10^3.53=3388
10^2.27=186
3388-186=3202 reduction.
3202/3388=x/100
x=95=percent decrease
Patient 3 is left as an exercise to the reader (as math and science textbooks always say 🙂 People with better math and science backgrounds, feel free to critique this calculation–is this how microbiologists to it?)
Janet says
Hi Leila,
I really love your outlook and advice and come here for some sanity and beauty. I was reading about math teaching strategies when I stumbled into the mask discussion. I assume everyone here loves their neighbors as much or more than I do and that you read as much or more than I do and so do others, at least those who are not currently caring for small children. I’m sorry if my comments come across as sounding as though I thought otherwise. I know I don’t write as well as you do and I seem to be having trouble being concise at the same time as being polite and supplying supporting evidence here, and also I am trying to rush so I can get back to things I need to do, so the editing/style may suffer.
I usually don’t comment on other people’s blogs–it’s your platform. But when you tell people you will avoid doing a simple thing that would make everyone safer and encourage others to follow, I have to speak up.
I just re-checked and all five of the most respected medical journals (Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, and Annals of Internal Medicine) have issued statements supported by evidence within the past month that the public should wear masks to reduce the transmission of Covid 19. So this is not political, or a matter of “belief” or personal . Some of the information about Covid has been developing–it was totally unknown just six months ago, so some initial mistakes were made and corrected. That’s OK. I don’t care what Sean or Rush or Fox say about masks–if people want to doubt universal respected current medical opinion, fine, but out of respect for those who think it unwise to ignore the overwhelming medical opinion which states that your mask protects us, or as your priest put it, “out of courtesy”, please wear a mask when encountering people outside of your household (or stay home) and encourage others to do the same. I am not questioning any of your readers “right” or “freedom” to do things that potentially infect others, but I am begging everyone to do simple things that make others safer, out of love and concern.
I don’t wear a mask working in the garden or in my own yard in my leafy suburb, and I understand that your area is more rural than mine. But when I am out where I may come in contact with other people, including church, I prefer to err on the side of caution and put on a mask because that way I don’t have to make a risk calculation every time I go somewhere–it becomes a habit no stress automatic, like covering coughs or washing hands.
It absolutely is well established that pre-symptomatic transmission is a major route of infection. A pre-symptomatic person can spread the virus for a few days before feeling at all sick. That’s why mask wearing is important in public–no one has a crystal ball.
(The kerfluffle about asymptomatic transmission was caused by a statement from Maria van Kerkhove from the WHO. She clarified that she meant we don’t have definitive answers yet as to whether people who NEVER go on to develop symptoms can transmit the virus. https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/09/who-comments-asymptomatic-spread-covid-19/) Since no one can know at any given point of time whether she might or might not develop symptoms in a few more days, the distinction does not matter for individual behavior.
Let’s all wear masks in public so we can drive the infection rate down and go back to normal activities sooner–visiting people in hospitals and retirement communities, going to church, weddings, funerals…. Being barred from those is a far, far more serious constriction of my freedom than a little piece of cloth.
So now I’m going to dive in again, with a bit of a weird analogy. Back when the effects of second hand smoke were not so definitively proven, some people would say, “My freedom to smoke trumps your freedom to breath clean air; if you don’t like it stay in your own house. It’s not courteous to object to smoke getting in your face and people with asthma or allergies are just snowflakes and we all gotta die sometime so smoking doesn’t matter”.
Not kind or courteous, regardless of whether you “believed” the science about second hand smoke back then. How long do we need to be courteous about possible Covid transmission? I don’t know, and like everyone else, I too am getting tired of this and wish things were like last year again. But I take it one day at a time and I do know that now is still the time to remain courteous, as your priest requested, even if *you* think the science is flawed. Anyone who has ever sat at the bedside of a person hospitalized with severe pneumonia or seen a life-threatening asthma attack would understand the need to do what we can easily do. Just as I can’t end poverty, but I still give try to to charities and [sometimes] to people in need, I can’t end the pandemic, but I can’t refuse to do the easy thing at hand that helps some.
Two statements from St. Paul keep buzzing in my head, even though they I am aware refer to a quite different topic: “All things are lawful to me, but not all things are profitable [helpful]” and “We who are strong ought to bear with the weak” (Hope that’s exact-quoting from memory here-Protestant childhood . Also from childhood “His right to swing his arm ends where my nose begins–definitely not St. Paul, but the playground and somewhat to the point in a different way.)
Re scariness of masks: When parents are stressed, and perhaps no longer going out to work, and kids outside activities are cancelled, and routines are changed, children pick up on the stress. If children can read, hear, or watch the news, there is plenty there that can stress them and us out. (Please turn off the news if the children are too young to read, for obvious reasons) Masks themselves are not the cause of the stress, and are not scary if children are taught to view them as something that helps keep people safe, like seat-belts or child-seats , or washing our hands so we don’t risk getting the premature baby sick, etc. –it becomes matter-of-fact. After all, children in cultures where mask wearing is common or routine are not stressed out by masks. In fact, many parents (including some in my own family, and some writing in national publications) have commented that the one upside of the pandemic is that their children are happier now that all the running around has stopped and they no longer have classroom pressure and just get to stay home with their parents.
Leila M. Lawler says
Janet, I’m glad you come here and benefit from what you find. I’m not trying to be inconsiderate or imprudent. Prudence, in fact, is the virtue of seeing things as they really are.
Everything you say is based on trusting the authorities. But those same authorities are allowing and even encouraging protesters to come by the tens of thousands to their cities. It has now been three weeks and there is zero evidence that these dire predictions have come to pass. Search “Brooklyn Museum June 14, 2020” and tell me how it can be possible that there is any such threat as we are being made to believe.
Re: second-hand smoke. It’s not the same. There really is smoke in the air. It does harm others. (On the other hand, you can survive walking past people who are smoking!) But there really isn’t an all-powerful virus ready to snatch you away, in the air. It’s clear now that there isn’t.
What you say just isn’t based on the reality of a virus that RIGHT NOW is poised to snatch anyone away — not more so than another. And we’ve been told now for four months that this is temporary — two weeks out, and then we will be able to return to normal.
Enough. There are real risks associated with wearing masks and even staying so distant from each other. Masks aren’t like seat belts. I can demonstrate with physics, completely objectively, what will happen to a person in a car going at a certain rate. No one can even say who will get covid or how it will affect them. Certainly, no children have been harmed by it, so right there we are dealing with fantasy, requiring children to be masked OUTDOORS on the playground AND stay 6 ft away from others (as in my state). Children who have been cooped up for four months. This is preserving health?
I’m going to link to a tweet thread that expresses my real anger at how this all played out. I encourage you to read it. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1268168284081459201.html
Amanda says
Janet,
I believe your reasoning in interpreting the data from the study above to be faulty. Perhaps you should read the study again. I will present here a few other medical articles as I mentioned that I would as I have time. Before we get to that, however, I need to say a couple things. First: I came to this discussion in good faith and expected that you would do the same. You have not. In order to have a debate about a subject it is usual for each side to present their evidence on why they believe what they believe. So far what you have done (instead of linking to studies proving your point) is to link to media articles and claim that “five of the most respected medical journals” have issued statements “supported by evidence” that people should be wearing masks. But no actual evidence is presented. What you are doing is called GASLIGHTING. I honestly don’t care whether I convince you or not but for the sake of anyone else who may be reading I will post a few more links. Then I strongly urge anyone else who might read this: don’t listen to Janet and don’t listen to me. Do your own research and come up with your own conclusions. You are allowed to do that, believe it or not. We have a vast wealth of information at our fingertips. Use your God given intellect and critical thinking and don’t just go along with whatever cultural pressures you are experiencing.
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/52/3/177/312528 Below are several quotes from this study
“the physical size of an SARS-causing coronavirus is about 0.08–0.14 μm (Ksiazek et al., 2003) and that of an H5N1 virus, which causes Avian influenza, is 0.08–0.12 μm (Mandell et al., 1995). The average physical size of B. anthracis is about 0.81–0.86 μm in diameter and 1.26–1.67 μm in length (Carrera et al., 2007)”
“When testing at an inhalation flow rate of 85 l min−1, the penetration of MS2 virions (0.01–0.08 μm) through the N95 respirator filter exceeded 5%. For surgical masks, the penetration was much higher and varied from 20.5 to 84.5%. In these studies, the respirators were sealed on a manikin face to account only for particles penetrating through the respirator filter material. However, airborne particles can also enter the respirator cavity through face-seal leaks and be subsequently inhaled into human respiratory systems.”
“The data obtained in the present study by count-based measurement show that particles approximately between 0.08 and 0.2 μm in aerodynamic diameter are more likely to penetrate into most of the tested N95 respirators. The respective size was 0.04–0.2 μm for surgical masks. Strikingly, the physical size of SARS-causing coronavirus is approximately 0.08–0.14 μm, and the physical size of influenza virus is 0.08–0.12 μm, i.e. the size ranges of these viruses fall into the most penetrating particle size range.”
“Conclusions: The study indicates that N95 filtering facepiece respirators may not achieve the expected protection level against bacteria and viruses. An exhalation valve on the N95 respirator does not affect the respiratory protection; it appears to be an appropriate alternative to reduce the breathing resistance.”
Please keep in mind, the above study was conducted with N95 masks which are used almost exclusively by medical personnel in hospitals and should offer the highest level of protection possible in a disposable mask. Surgical masks fall far below N95 masks in their ability to filter particles/viruses/bacteria. I encourage you to read the entire study.
Next:
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 Again, I will copy some excerpts below in quotes.
“Objective The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cloth masks to medical masks in hospital healthcare workers (HCWs). The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between medical masks and cloth masks.”
“Main outcome measure Clinical respiratory illness (CRI), influenza-like illness (ILI) and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infection.”
“Results The rates of all infection outcomes were highest in the cloth mask arm, with the rate of ILI statistically significantly higher in the cloth mask arm (relative risk (RR)=13.00, 95% CI 1.69 to 100.07) compared with the medical mask arm. Cloth masks also had significantly higher rates of ILI compared with the control arm. An analysis by mask use showed ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) were significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%.”
“Conclusions This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.”
“The rates of CRI, ILI and laboratory-confirmed virus infections were lowest in the medical mask arm, followed by the control arm, and highest in the cloth mask arm.”
“A post-hoc analysis adjusted for compliance and other potential confounders showed that the rate of ILI was significantly higher in the cloth mask arm (RR=13.00, 95% CI 1.69 to 100.07), compared with the medical masks arm (table 4). There was no significant difference between the medical mask and control arms. Hand washing was significantly protective against laboratory-confirmed viral infection (RR=0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97).”
“On average, HCWs worked for 25 days during the trial period and washed their cloth masks for 23/25 (92%) days. The most common approach to washing cloth masks was self-washing (456/569, 80%), followed by combined self-washing and hospital laundry (91/569, 16%), and only hospital laundry (22/569, 4%). Adverse events associated with facemask use were reported in 40.4% (227/562) of HCWs in the medical mask arm and 42.6% (242/568) in the cloth mask arm (p value 0.450). General discomfort (35.1%, 397/1130) and breathing problems (18.3%, 207/1130) were the most frequently reported adverse events.”
“Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%)."
The above study was the most concerning for me regarding the use of cloth masks specifically.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x
"In conclusion, there is a limited evidence base to support the use of masks and/or respirators in healthcare or community settings. Mask use is best undertaken as part of a package of personal protection, especially including hand hygiene in both home and healthcare settings. Early initiation and correct and consistent wearing of masks/respirators may improve their effectiveness. However, this remains a major challenge – both in the context of a formal study and in everyday practice."
This particular review (above) presented a lot of information from both sides of the debate. Please note that they are referring to surgical masks and N95 respirators here.
I don't have time to cite more right now and I think I am done here. Anyone can find this information as it is widely available on the internet. My only word of advice as far as internet searches are concerned is to actually read the studies as they are published (not the headlines or news articles) and click through all of the sources cited for more detailed information. Also many of the journals have links to similar articles.
-Amanda
Janet says
Winding down here, but I didn’t want you to think there were no scholarly articles supporting the use of masks by the public. I linked to a media article earlier because it gave a short summary of the reasoning. People who read this blog are already pretty independent thinkers who order their lives in ways which are not supported by today’s mainstream cultural assumptions, so I know they would not reject masks because of some political group think, so here are some academic articles, since you asked for them:
https://rs-delve.github.io/reports/2020/05/04/face-masks-for-the-general-public.html
Leung NHL et al. 2020 Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks. Nature Medicine (doi: 10.5061/dryad.w9ghx3fkt).
“Specifically, coronaviruses were detected in 30% and 40% of droplet and aerosol samples, respectively, from symptomatic individuals not wearing masks, and in no samples for both droplets and aerosols for symptomatic individuals wearing surgical masks45”
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/63/8/999/2389110
The overall incidence of RVI [respiratory viral infections] dropped from 95 of 920 (10.3%) in the premask cohort to 40 of 911 (4.4%) in the mask cohort (P < .001; Table 2). In a study of hospitalized stem cell transfer patients. Intervention was surgical masks for all visitors and staff.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32467353/
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30918-1/fulltext
“Mass masking is underpinned by basic public health principles that might not have been adequately appreciated by authorities or the public. First, controlling harms at source (masking) is at least as important as mitigation (handwashing). The population benefits of mass masking can also be conceptualised as a so-called prevention paradox—ie, interventions that bring moderate benefits to individuals but have large population benefits.”
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.13553.pdf very technical but excellent
https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/06/10/2009637117
Compares rate of new infections before and after implementation of universal masking in public. See especially fig. 3 for brief data summary
More available if you would like.
Here is a fascinating computer simulation that allows you to adjust for percentage of mask wearers and mask efficacy. The video shows how to use it. http://dek.ai/masksim/
Here is an article from Fox News if you trust them more https://www.foxnews.com/science/coronavirus-infections-plunge-80-percent-wore-masks
The articles you cite do not actually contradict the efficacy of universal public mask wearing to reduce transmission— they mostly refer to how well masks protect the health care worker wearing them, not how well they prevent viral transmission from pre-symptomatic wearers.
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/52/3/177/312528This study deals with protection of the mask wearer from particles in the range 0.08 and 0.2 μm, but aerosols are much larger-see https://rs-delve.github.io/reports/2020/05/04/face-masks-for-the-general-public.html “Aerosols refer to suspensions in gas of small particles (typically 20 µm)” [Covid is not thought to spread primarily through droplets and aerosols, not naked viruses, so efficacy of surgical and N95 masks in the range of naked viral size may not be the only/main factor in protecting the public. Many good references in this article
Also, this study deals with a respiratory rate of 85 l min−1 (a rate for strenuous work) , while the normal resting human respiratory rate is between 5 to 8 l/min.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x This 2012 study states “There are limited data on the use of masks and respirators to reduce transmission of influenza” “Eight of nine retrospective observational studies found that mask and/or respirator use was independently associated with a reduced risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).”
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 This 2015 study from Hanoi deals with how well various masks protect hospital workers wearing masks from infection, not how well they reduce transmission to others. Cloth masks were less effective than medical masks. The authors have published an update, with a link prominently displayed at the top of the original article:
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.responses#covid-19-shortages-of-masks-and-the-use-of-cloth-masks-as-a-last-resort
“It is important to note that some subjects in the control arm wore surgical masks, which could explain why cloth masks performed poorly compared to the control group.” They say that if health care workers cannot access medical grade PPE, cloth masks probably offer the healthcare workers better protection than nothing and point out that cloth masks should be washed and dried regularly and wearers should have spares.
Some people do wear masks incorrectly, so more education is needed, but just as we do not tell people to not bother washing their hands because the general public does not do it as well as surgical nurses, we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good regarding wearing masks in public where there is risk of asymptomatic viral spreading..
Ideally we would like to have double blind RCT studies, you know, with 100 isolated population centers matched for population health, density, behavior, initial seeding, climate, etc. except that half wear masks but don’t know they are wearing them 😉. We don’t have to wait for that kind of evidence. In the interim, we use reason and common sense, informed by carefully examined expert opinion (not WHO, CCP, CDC, FDA and similarly politically compromised groups-what they say is neither here nor there) the annoyance of wearing masks is more than offset by the reduced risk of spreading the virus to someone who may become gravely ill, especially since it can speed the safer reopening of business and public facilities and get us closer to normal life sooner, and we all want that! Excuse me if I see this as more of a problem than you do. A zip code less than 2 miles from my home has a documented test-confirmed rate of Covid of 1/36 and my mother is in the hospital and I’m not allowed to stay with her.Let’s all do what we can.
Leila says
Again, some of this is about medical masks, and all of it assumes that there is a virus out there waiting to get us. And that is demonstrably false.
So now we’re done. No more on this topic here.
Jamie Gottlieb says
Auntie Leila! Thank you for your post on math. I would love to know what other readers or you think are good math books that do teach with lesson and drill? I have lots of younger kids, some thriving with Saxon (perhaps some brains handle it better) and some not thriving but doing ok overall. I bought a copy of Lial’s Basic College Mathematics for my pre-algebra child. It looks like the type of book that would allow us to better work on the odds and it was cheap to buy used and look over. I think he might do better with it than all the skipping around in Saxon.Thank you for the reminder to play LOTS of games this summer! I love your education posts – keep them coming! You are a blessing.