|
?:reviewBody
|
-
Another day, another viral claim about the effectiveness (or not) of face masks amid the coronavirus pandemic of 2020. A popular Facebook post that had been copied and pasted numerous times in June repeated spurious but familiar claims about masks, this time selectively citing U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) recommendations: In July 2020, a similar post — this time attributed to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — made almost identical claims about N95 masks, surgical masks, and cloth masks. This photo circulated online: The lengthy posts focused on three different types of protective masks: N95 masks, surgical masks, and cloth masks. We tackle assertions about each one below. According to the posts your unfiltered, potentially infectious breath could harm others if you are breathing through an N95 respirator. This is mostly true, except it only applies to N95 respirators with valves. Such masks were designed for construction/factory workers or miners, to keep out dust and other particles, but not to prevent infectious particles from leaving the mask. When the wearer inhales, the one-way valve closes so pathogens can’t get through, but when the user exhales, the valve opens. In May, the San Francisco Department of Public Health tweeted that N95 masks with valves in the front weren’t safe and may actually propel your germs further. Hospitals largely use N95 masks without valves for this reason, and in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations. OSHA's guidelines on N95s primarily focus on how they are meant to prevent workers from inhaling small particles, including airborne transmissible or aerosolized infectious agents, and should be required in workplaces where respirators are needed. The Facebook post argues that wearing a surgical mask makes you a walking virus dispenser, as follows: OSHA guidelines seem to contradict some of these claims, arguing that surgical masks protect workers against [potentially infectious] splashes and sprays, and also contain the wearer's respiratory droplets to protect others. OSHA says these masks should be placed on sick individuals to prevent transmission via droplets. Surgical masks do, however, offer ineffective protection from transmission via airborne particles due to their loose fit. While the post argues that such masks should be thrown out every 20-30 minutes, OSHA simply recommends that they should be properly disposed of after use. The Facebook post's and letter's claims about cloth masks are mostly false and have been debunked by Snopes before. The author claims: OSHA guidelines already state that cloth masks are ineffective filters against airborne particles. They are worn to protect other people from risk of infection via respiratory droplets. People wearing them are in little to no danger of breathing in unhealthy amounts of carbon dioxide. The posts point out the danger of dirty masks, which is why both OSHA and CDC recommend washing cloth masks after use. OSHA also generally recommends that employers encourage workers to wear face coverings at work, contradicting the argument of this entire post. Finally, the author of the Facebook post claimed to be OSHA 10&30 certified, which refers to OSHA’s 10-hour and 30-hour training modules about common health and safety hazards in the workplace. We reached out to OSHA, and a representative told us that these courses do not include COVID-19 topics, nor does OSHA certify trainers. Snopes also reached out to the CDC about the photograph of the notice. They directed us to their guidance on cloth masks, and issued the following statement: In sum, the varied claims in these viral posts (with their dubious origins) for the most part misrepresented information provided by OSHA and the CDC. Scientific wisdom argues that wearing a mask is more effective than doing nothing, and, combined with social distancing and other safety measures, offers protection not only to the wearer but to others. Given these posts' combination of only a few correct facts and largely incorrect conclusions, we rate their various claims as Mostly False.
(en)
|
![[This page as RDF]](http://data.gesis.org/claimskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}