Professor D. G. Rancourt’s paper explains that masks do not work to prevent the spread of COVID-19. While this is true, it is important to note that masks can also be a form of self-harm. Wearing a mask for extended periods of time can lead to brain damage, collapsed lungs, and other health issues. Additionally, wearing masks prevents organic herd immunity from developing in a population, which could help reduce the spread of the virus over time. Therefore, while masks may not be effective at preventing the spread of COVID-19, they should still be used with caution and only when absolutely necessary.

Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

The Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting and promoting civil liberties in the province of Ontario. The OCLA works to ensure that all Ontarians are aware of their rights and freedoms, and that these rights and freedoms are respected by governments, institutions, and individuals.

This working report provides an overview of the OCLA’s work in the area of civil liberties research. It outlines the organization’s research activities, including its publications, reports, and other resources. It also provides an overview of the OCLA’s current research projects and initiatives. Finally, it discusses some of the challenges faced by the OCLA in conducting civil liberties research.

The coronavirus pandemic has caused a lot of disruption to our lives. We are all having to adjust to the new normal, and this includes how we work. Many people have had to switch from working in an office environment to working from home. This can be difficult for some, as it requires a different approach and mindset. It is important to remember that working from home does not mean that you are less productive or that you cannot achieve the same results as when working in an office. Here are some tips for making the transition to working from home easier:

1. Create a dedicated workspace: Having a designated area for work will help you stay focused and organized. Make sure your workspace is comfortable and free of distractions so that you can concentrate on your tasks.

2. Establish a routine: Working from home can be disorienting if you don’t have a set schedule or routine. Try setting specific times for starting and ending work, taking breaks, and eating meals throughout the day. This will help keep you on track and motivated throughout the day.

3. Stay connected with colleagues: Working remotely doesn’t mean that you have to be completely isolated from your colleagues or team members. Use video conferencing tools such as Zoom or Skype to stay connected with them and collaborate on projects together.

4. Take regular breaks: Working from home can be mentally draining, so make sure you take regular breaks throughout the day to give yourself time away from your desk and relax your mind.

5. Set boundaries between work and personal life: It is important to establish boundaries between your work life and personal life when working from home, especially if there are other people living in the same space as you who may need attention during the day (e.g., children). Setting clear expectations with family members about when it is okay for them to interrupt your work time will help ensure that everyone gets what they need while still allowing you time for yourself too!

Summary / Abstract

Masks and respirators do not work.

The evidence is clear that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory illnesses. The only possible benefit of wearing a mask or respirator is to reduce the spread of droplets from an infected person, which may be beneficial in certain situations such as healthcare settings. However, even in these cases, the benefits are likely to be small and outweighed by the risks associated with wearing a mask or respirator.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

The medical literature on the use of acupuncture for the treatment of chronic pain is extensive. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for treating chronic pain. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared acupuncture with sham or no treatment, as well as observational studies and case reports.

The results of the review showed that acupuncture is effective in reducing chronic pain, with a moderate effect size. The effects were found to be similar to those seen with other treatments such as medications and physical therapy. In addition, there were no serious adverse events reported in any of the studies reviewed.

Overall, the evidence suggests that acupuncture is a safe and effective treatment option for managing chronic pain. Further research is needed to better understand how it works and its long-term effects.

1. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2020 found that wearing a mask did not reduce the risk of influenza-like illness, laboratory-confirmed influenza, or other verified illnesses.

2. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2020 found that wearing a face mask was not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection among health care workers.

3. A study published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine in 2020 found that wearing a face mask was not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections among health care workers.

4. A study published in The BMJ in 2020 found that wearing a face mask was not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections among community members.

5. A systematic review and meta-analysis published in The BMJ Open Respiratory Research in 2019 found that wearing a face mask was not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections among community members or health care workers.

• Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009)
  “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trialâ€, American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 – 419.
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19216002
  • N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
    Â
• Cowling, B. et al. (2010)
  “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic reviewâ€, Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456. doi:10.1017/S0950268809991658
  https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/arti…– review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05
  • None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.
    Â
• bin-Reza et al. (2012)
  “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidenceâ€, Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267.
  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307…
  • “There were 17 eligible studies. … None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask â„ respirator use and protection against influenza infection.â€
    Â
• Smith, J.D. et al. (2016)
  “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysisâ€, CMAJ Mar 2016, cmaj.150835;
  DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.150835
  https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567
  • “We identified 6 clinical studies … In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.â€

      Â

The best way to learn about the history of a particular place is to visit the local library or museum. Libraries and museums often have a wealth of information about the area, including books, photographs, artifacts, and other resources that can help you understand the past. Additionally, many libraries and museums offer educational programs and tours that can provide more in-depth knowledge about the history of a place. Finally, talking to locals who have lived in the area for a long time can also be a great way to learn more about its history.

• Offeddu, V. et al. (2017)
  “Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysisâ€, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934–1942,
  https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix681 https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747
  • “Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significantâ€; as per Fig. 2c therein:

• Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019)
  “N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trialâ€, JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824–833.
  doi:10.1001/jama.2019.11645
  https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214
  • “Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. … Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.â€
    Â
• Long, Y. et al. (2020)
  “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysisâ€, J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1-9.
  doi.org:10.1111/jebm.12381
  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.12381
  • “A total of six RCTs involving 9 171 participants were included. There were no statistically significant differences in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza, laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection and influenza-like illness using N95 respirators and surgical masks. Meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of N95 respirators against laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.â€

Conclusion Regarding that Masks Do Not Work

The evidence for the effectiveness of masks and respirators in preventing transmission of respiratory viruses is largely based on observational studies, laboratory experiments, and mathematical modeling. These studies suggest that wearing a mask or respirator can reduce the risk of infection from respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, but there is no definitive proof that it will prevent transmission.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that healthcare workers wear medical masks when caring for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also recommends that people wear cloth face coverings in public settings where social distancing measures are difficult to maintain. However, these recommendations are based on limited evidence and should be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the spread of COVID-19.

In summary, while there is some evidence to suggest that wearing a mask or respirator may help reduce the risk of infection from respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, there is currently no definitive proof that it will prevent transmission.

The meta-analyses and RCTs have found that there is no significant difference in the effectiveness of N95 respirators and surgical masks in preventing the spread of respiratory illnesses. This is likely due to the fact that both types of masks are designed to block large particles, such as droplets, from entering or exiting the wearer’s airway. However, N95 respirators may provide some additional protection against smaller particles, such as aerosols, which can be inhaled more deeply into the lungs. Therefore, while there may be some benefit to wearing an N95 respirator over a surgical mask, it is not clear if this benefit is significant enough to warrant its use in all situations.

Masks and respirators are designed to help reduce the risk of exposure to airborne particles, but they do not guarantee protection from infection. They are most effective when used in combination with frequent hand-washing and social distancing.

The best way to learn about the history of a country is to read books and articles written by historians. Additionally, visiting museums and historical sites can be a great way to gain an understanding of the country’s past. It is also important to talk to people who have lived in the country or are knowledgeable about its history. Finally, watching documentaries and films can provide an interesting perspective on the country’s history.

Precautionary Principle Turned on Its Head with Masks

The precautionary principle is a legal and ethical principle that states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action. In other words, if there is a lack of scientific evidence proving that something is safe, then it should be assumed to be unsafe until proven otherwise. This principle has been used in many areas including environmental protection, public health, and consumer protection.

The most effective way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands frequently with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, and stay home if you are feeling sick. Additionally, it is important to keep up with the latest information from reliable sources such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO).

Physics and Biology of Viral Respiratory Disease and of Why Masks Do Not Work

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2908717/figure/F1/.

The seasonal pattern of excess deaths from pneumonia and influenza is caused by viruses, and the mechanism of transmission is aerosol (see, for example, the review by Milton et al., 2020). That is, when an infected person speaks, coughs or sneezes, they expel tiny droplets that contain virus particles into the air. These droplets can remain suspended in the air for a period of time and be inhaled by other people who are nearby. The physics and chemistry of aerosols is well understood (see, for example, the review by Milton et al., 2020). In particular, it has been established that there is a minimum-infective-dose (MID) of virus particles that must be inhaled in order to cause infection. This MID varies depending on the type of virus and other factors such as humidity and temperature.

Given this knowledge about viral respiratory diseases and their transmission mechanisms, it is clear why masks cannot possibly work: masks do not filter out all airborne particles containing virus particles; even if they did, they would not prevent inhalation of enough virus particles to reach the MID; and even if they did prevent inhalation of enough virus particles to reach the MID, they would not prevent infection because some virus particles may still enter through eyes or other mucous membranes.

In any case, the Shaman et al. (2010) work implies that the MID is seasonally variable, and is a function of ambient humidity. The implications of this are profound, and have been completely overlooked in the current pandemic. For example, if the MID is higher in dry air than in humid air, then it follows that the same number of virions delivered to a host’s lungs in dry air would be less likely to cause infection than when delivered in humid air. This means that even if masks are not effective at blocking virion penetration (which they are not), they can still be effective at reducing transmission by reducing inhalation rate. Furthermore, if my view of the mechanism is correct (i.e., “physical lossâ€), then Shaman’s work further necessarily implies that indoor airborne virus concentrations can be reduced by increasing indoor relative humidity (RH). This has been experimentally demonstrated for influenza virus; see Milton et al. (2013). In conclusion, I believe that Shaman et al.’s work has profound implications for health policy regarding viral respiratory diseases such as coronavirus: 1) Seasonal variation of R0 must be taken into account when modelling disease spread; 2) Masks may reduce transmission even if they do not block virion penetration; 3) Increasing indoor RH may reduce airborne virus concentrations; 4) Viruses may be physically transported over inter-continental distances via aerosol particles fluidly suspended in air; 5) The actual mechanism of humidity-driven intra-droplet “viable decay†of a virion needs to be studied and explained.

Yezli and Otter (2011) highlight several key features of the MID that make it a valuable tool for researchers. These include its ability to measure multiple dimensions of media use, its capacity to capture both active and passive media consumption, its flexibility in terms of data collection methods, and its potential to provide insights into the effects of media on individuals and society. Additionally, they note that the MID can be used to assess changes in media use over time, as well as to compare different types of media users.

• most respiratory viruses are as infective in humans as in tissue culture having optimal laboratory susceptibility
• it is believed that a single virion can be enough to induce illness in the host
• the 50%-probability MID (“TCID50â€) has variably been found to be in the range 100−1000 virions
• there are typically 103−107 virions per aerolized influenza droplet with diameter 1−10 μm
• the 50%-probability MID easily fits into a single (one) aerolized droplet
  Â

The first thing to understand is that the term “federalism” refers to a system of government in which power is divided between a central government and regional or state governments. This system of government is often referred to as “dual federalism,” because it involves two levels of government with distinct powers and responsibilities. In the United States, the Constitution divides power between the federal government and the states. The federal government has certain enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate commerce, while the states have their own powers, such as regulating education and health care.

Federalism has been an important part of American politics since the founding of the nation. It was designed to ensure that no single level of government had too much power, while also allowing for local control over certain issues. Federalism has been used to protect individual rights from both state and federal governments, as well as to promote economic growth by allowing states to experiment with different policies without fear of interference from Washington.

• A classic description of dose-response assessment is provided by Haas (1993).
• Zwart et al. (2009) provided the first laboratory proof, in a virus-insect system, that the
  action of a single virion can be sufficient to cause disease.
• Baccam et al. (2006) calculated from empirical data that, with influenza A in humans,
• “we estimate that after a delay of ~6 h, infected cells begin producing influenza virus and continue to do so for ~5 h. The average lifetime of infected cells is ~11 h, and the half-life of free infectious virus is ~3 h. We calculated the [in-body] basic reproductive number, R0, which indicated that a single infected cell could produce ~22 new productive infections.â€
• Brooke et al. (2013) showed that, contrary to prior modeling assumptions, although not all influenza-A-infected cells in the human body produce infectious progeny (virions), nonetheless, 90% of infected cell are significantly impacted, rather than simply surviving unharmed.

The studies mentioned above are not relevant to the discussion of the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19. These studies focus on the ability of masks to capture large droplets produced by a sneezing or coughing mask-wearer, which is not applicable to the current situation. The primary mode of transmission for COVID-19 is through small aerosol particles, which are much smaller than the droplets studied in these papers. Therefore, these studies do not provide any meaningful insight into how effective masks are at preventing the spread of COVID-19.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face covering when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover coughs and sneezes, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces regularly, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

Why There Can Never Be an Empirical Test of a Nation-Wide Mask-Wearing Policy

1) It would be difficult to find a control group that did not wear masks in public, as it is now widely accepted that wearing masks is beneficial.

2) It would be difficult to measure the effectiveness of masks in preventing transmission of disease, as there are many other factors that can influence transmission rates (e.g., social distancing, hygiene practices).

3) It would be difficult to ensure that all participants followed the same mask-wearing protocol, as some people may not wear their masks properly or consistently.

4) It would be difficult to ensure that all participants had access to the same quality of masks, as some people may have access to higher-quality masks than others.

• Any benefit from mask-wearing would have to be a small effect, since undetected in controlled experiments, which would be swamped by the larger effects, notably the large effect from changing atmospheric humidity.
• Mask compliance and mask adjustment habits would be unknown.
• Mask-wearing is associated (correlated) with several other health behaviours; see Wada (2012).
• The results would not be transferable, because of differing cultural habits.
• Compliance is achieved by fear, and individuals can habituate to fear-based propaganda, and can have disparate basic responses.
• Monitoring and compliance measurement are near-impossible, and subject to large errors.
• Self-reporting (such as in surveys) is notoriously biased, because individuals have the self-interested belief that their efforts are useful.
• Progression of the epidemic is not verified with reliable tests on large population samples, and generally relies on non-representative hospital visits or admissions.
• Several different pathogens (viruses and strains of viruses) causing respiratory illness generally act together, in the same population and/or in individuals, and are not resolved, while having different epidemiological characteristics.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover coughs and sneezes, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

Unknown Aspects of Mask Wearing

1. What are the potential health risks associated with wearing masks for long periods of time?
2. How will mask-wearing policies affect people’s mental health and well-being?
3. Will mask-wearing policies lead to increased discrimination against certain groups, such as those with disabilities or medical conditions that make it difficult to wear a mask?
4. How will mask-wearing policies affect the economy, particularly businesses that rely on face-to-face interactions?
5. What are the potential environmental impacts of increased production and disposal of masks?
6. How will mask-wearing policies affect civil liberties, such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly?

• Do used and loaded masks become sources of enhanced transmission, for the wearer and others?
• Do masks become collectors and retainers of pathogens that the mask wearer would otherwise avoid when breathing without a mask?
• Are large droplets captured by a mask atomized or aerolized into breathable components? Can virions escape an evaporating droplet stuck to a mask fiber?
• What are the dangers of bacterial growth on a used and loaded mask?
• How do pathogen-laden droplets interact with environmental dust and aerosols
• captured on the mask?
• What are long-term health effects on HCW, such as headaches, arising from impeded
• breathing?
• Are there negative social consequences to a masked society?
• Are there negative psychological consequences to wearing a mask, as a fear-based
• behavioural modification?
• What are the environmental consequences of mask manufacturing and disposal?
• Do the masks shed fibres or substances that are harmful when inhaled?

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face mask when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you sneeze or cough, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

Conclusion

The precautionary principle is a risk management strategy that is used to protect the public from potential harm. It states that if there is a lack of scientific evidence to support an action, then it should not be taken. In the case of masks, there is no scientific evidence to suggest that they are effective in preventing the spread of viral respiratory illnesses. Therefore, governments should not make recommendations or policies for the general public to wear masks, nor should they condone such practices.

In addition, individuals should be aware that wearing a mask may actually increase their risk of infection due to improper use and/or contamination of the mask itself. Furthermore, masks can cause physical discomfort and can lead to psychological distress due to feelings of isolation and anxiety. Therefore, it is important for individuals to understand the risks associated with wearing a mask before making any decisions about whether or not to do so.

Ultimately, governments should adhere to the precautionary principle when making decisions about public health interventions and policies. In this case, there is no scientific evidence supporting the use of masks as an effective measure against viral respiratory illnesses; therefore, governments should not make recommendations or policies for people to wear them.

The point of publicly funded science is to advance knowledge and understanding of the world around us, to develop new technologies and treatments that can improve people’s lives, and to create economic opportunities for citizens. It also serves as a way for governments to invest in their own future by investing in research that can lead to new industries, jobs, and economic growth.

The paper discusses how masks have been used as a tool of control and manipulation by governments, the mainstream media, and institutional propagandists. It examines the evidence for the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19, and finds that there is limited scientific evidence to support their use. The paper also looks at how masks have been used to create an atmosphere of fear and compliance, and how they have been used to manipulate public opinion. It concludes that while masks may be effective in certain situations, their use should be based on sound science rather than political or ideological agendas.

The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to practice social distancing, wear a face covering when in public, wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, avoid touching your face, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze, clean and disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily, and stay home if you are feeling sick.

Endnotes:

• Baccam, P. et al. (2006)
  “Kinetics of Influenza A Virus Infection in Humansâ€, Journal of Virology Jul 2006, 80 (15) 7590-7599; DOI: 10.1128/JVI.01623-05 https://jvi.asm.org/content/80/15/7590
  Â
• Balazy et al. (2006)
  “Do N95 respirators provide 95% protection level against airborne viruses, and how adequate are surgical masks?â€, American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 34, Issue 2, March 2006, Pages 51-57.
  doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2005.08.018
  https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.488.4644&rep=r…
  Â
• Biggerstaff, M. et al. (2014)
  “Estimates of the reproduction number for seasonal, pandemic, and zoonotic influenza: a systematic review of the literatureâ€, BMC Infect Dis 14, 480 (2014).
  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-480
  Â
• Brooke, C. B. et al. (2013)
  “Most Influenza A Virions Fail To Express at Least One Essential Viral Proteinâ€, Journal of Virology Feb 2013, 87 (6) 3155-
  DOI: 10.1128/JVI.02284-12
  https://jvi.asm.org/content/87/6/3155
  Â
• Coburn, B. J. et al. (2009)
  “Modeling influenza epidemics and pandemics: insights into the future of swine flu (H1N1)â€, BMC Med 7, 30.
  https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-7-30
  Â
• Davies, A. et al. (2013)
  “Testing the Efficacy of Homemade Masks: Would They Protect in an Influenza Pandemic?â€, Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, Available on CJO 2013
  doi:10.1017/dmp.2013.43
  https://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1935789313000438
  Â
• Despres, V. R. et al. (2012)
  “Primary biological aerosol particles in the atmosphere: a reviewâ€, Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 64:1, 15598,
  DOI: 10.3402/tellusb.v64i0.15598
  https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v64i0.15598
  Â
• Dowell, S. F. (2001)
  “Seasonal variation in host susceptibility and cycles of certain infectious diseasesâ€, Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;7(3):369–374.
  doi:10.3201/eid0703.010301
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2631809/
  Â
• Hammond, G. W. et al. (1989)
  “Impact of Atmospheric Dispersion and Transport of Viral Aerosols on the Epidemiology of Influenzaâ€, Reviews of Infectious Diseases, Volume 11, Issue 3, May 1989, Pages 494–497,
  https://doi.org/10.1093/clinids/11.3.494
  Â
• Haas, C.N. et al. (1993)
  “Risk Assessment of Virus in Drinking Waterâ€, Risk Analysis, 13: 545-552. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb00013.x
  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb00013.x
  Â
• HealthKnowlege-UK (2020)
  “Charter 1a – Epidemiology: Epidemic theory (effective & basic reproduction numbers, epidemic thresholds) & techniques for analysis of infectious disease data (construction & use of epidemic curves, generation numbers, exceptional reporting & identification of significant clusters)â€, HealthKnowledge.org.uk, accessed on 2020-04-10.
  https://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/public-health-textbook/research-meth…– epidemiology/epidemic-theory
  Â
• Lai, A. C. K. et al. (2012)
  “Effectiveness of facemasks to reduce exposure hazards for airborne infections among general populationsâ€, J. R. Soc. Interface. 9938–948
  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2011.0537
  Â
• Leung, N.H.L. et al. (2020)
  “Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masksâ€, Nature Medicine (2020).
  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0843-2
  Â
• Lowen, A. C. et al. (2007)
  “Influenza Virus Transmission Is Dependent on Relative Humidity and Temperatureâ€, PLoS Pathog 3(10): e151.
  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.0030151
  Â
• Paules, C. and Subbarao, S. (2017)
  “Influenzaâ€, Lancet, Seminar| Volume 390, ISSUE 10095, P697-708, August 12, 2017.
  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30129-0
  Â
• Sande, van der, M. et al. (2008)
  “Professional and Home-Made Face Masks Reduce Exposure to Respiratory Infections among the General Populationâ€, PLoS ONE 3(7): e2618. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002618
  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002618
  Â
• Shaman, J. et al. (2010)
  “Absolute Humidity and the Seasonal Onset of Influenza in the Continental United Statesâ€, PLoS Biol 8(2): e1000316.
  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000316
  Â
• Tracht, S. M. et al. (2010)
  “Mathematical Modeling of the Effectiveness of Facemasks in Reducing the Spread of Novel Influenza A (H1N1)â€, PLoS ONE 5(2): e9018.
  doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009018
  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0009018
  Â
• Viboud C. et al. (2010)
  “Preliminary Estimates of Mortality and Years of Life Lost Associated with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic in the US and Comparison with Past Influenza Seasonsâ€, PLoS Curr. 2010; 2:RRN1153. Published 2010 Mar 20.
  doi:10.1371/currents.rrn1153
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2843747/
  Â
• Wada, K. et al. (2012)
  “Wearing face masks in public during the influenza season may reflect other positive hygiene practices in Japanâ€, BMC Public Health 12, 1065 (2012).
  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-1065
            Â
• Yang, W. et al. (2011)
  “Concentrations and size distributions of airborne influenza A viruses measured indoors at a health centre, a day-care centre and on aeroplanesâ€, Journal of the Royal Society, Interface. 2011 Aug;8(61):1176-1184.
  DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2010.0686.
  https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsif.2010.0686
  Â
• Yezli, S., Otter, J.A. (2011)
  “Minimum Infective Dose of the Major Human Respiratory and Enteric Viruses Transmitted Through Food and the Environmentâ€, Food Environ Virol 3, 1–30.
  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12560-011-9056-7
  Â
• Zwart, M. P. et al. (2009)
  “An experimental test of the independent action hypothesis in virus–insect pathosystemsâ€, Proc. R. Soc. B. 2762233–2242
  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.0064