DESE Claim 2 (footnote #27): "Mask breaks should occur throughout the day."
DESE Claim 3 (footnote #30): "There is no precise threshold for safety; indeed, studies suggest that physical distancing of three feet or more leads to reduced transmission, with additional distance providing additional protection."
Cited Source: Chu, D.K., Akl, E.A., Duda S., Solo K., Yaacoub S., Schunemann H.J. (2020) Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet
Note: no link is provided in the DESE citation. I used Google to find this link to the study.
Peer Reviewed?: Yes
Study Methodology: "systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses"
Notes: The review of 172 studied indicated that physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection were all protective against COVID-19. Different types of masks offered different levels of protection. "[...]our findings continued to support the ideas not only that masks in general are associated with a large reduction in risk of infection from SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV but also that N95 or similar respirators might be associated with a larger degree of protection from viral infection than disposable medical masks or reusable multilayer (12–16-layer) cotton masks." Mask efficacy is supported by the study. Physical distancing efficacy is also supported with moderate confidence.
Supports DESE Claim 1?: Yes.
Supports DESE Claim 2?: No. There is no mention of mask breaks in the article.
Supports DESE Claim 3?: Yes.
No comments:
Post a Comment