Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing mask guidance here in Thailand, so-called. I was thinking about doing this video and then other things kind of popped up and it has been kind of on my back burner. I saw a recent comment and when I see a comment that is sort of in line with something I am already thinking of doing, it kind of reinforces my thought that yeah it is probably time to do something on that. The recent comment was on a prior video on our channel, quoting directly: "Ben can you touch on the situation there as it pertains to masks in public transportation. Will they ever drop the mask and do they expect foreigners to comply? Thanks Ben.” Well look people can choose to wear whatever they want but the fact of the matter is I have been on mass transit here in Thailand multiple times in the past few months, both the underground and the sky train; there's no mask requirement. Now a lots of Thai folks are wearing masks, that is their decision. Look the other thing is I think there is a little bit of a conflation going on here with regard to masks as they pertain to the whole COVID situation and then masks as they pertain to the air here in Bangkok. There are some air issues with regard to the PM 2.5, the dust and all of that good stuff and then we are in the burn season which is always loads of fun with regard to air quality. I suspect that there is a little bit of conflation going on here between the issue of COVID masking and the issue of just general masking associated with air quality. So that is first and foremost. But no, I have been on the sky train and the underground myself in the past week and I didn't wear a mask and nobody looked twice at it. It's not a big deal. One of the things I love about Thais is it is "live and let live". Look if you want to do what you are doing, do what you do you and they leave you be about it. I have always liked that. 

That said, I thought about making this in a broader context because unfortunately this "guidance" sort of persists. I have actually had this impact people close to me, I won't go any further than that because there's no point but yeah there is this kind of persistent sort of "guidance" and it's still kind of floating around out there that this is an effective measure and all of this for dealing with this and quite honestly, well let's dig into that because I just don't think that's really correct. The first place I want to go real quick is Cochrane Library, that is cochranelibrary.com, and the entry is titled: Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. This is like, I believe it is a compilation of peer-reviewed studies that then itself is subject to peer review. So it's sort of like an aggregation of the data on this and quoting directly here: "Although the benefits of fiscal interventions seem self-evident given the global importance of interrupting respiratory virus transmission, having up-to-date estimates of their effectiveness is necessary to inform planning, decision making, and policy." I think that is well put. Now, note that is sort of later on as you get more to the conclusion of this overall treatise if you will. Quoting from an earlier part of the study though, specifically under the subheading: Medical/surgical mask compared to no mask. Quoting directly: "We included 12 trials (10 cluster-RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community)." I will state that again: "two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community", this isn't an insignificant thing and this is worth noting this quote here, quote: "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants;" I say that again: "276,917 participants" - a pretty good sample size. "moderate-certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Harms were really measured and poorly reported (very low-certainty evidence)."

So again, I don't know how much more definitive you can get other than a study like this that says hey again I want to quote this again:  "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks." 

So meanwhile we sort of know I guess you could look at it, (sorry I'm kind of sweating here, it is a hot morning-it has been very hot here in Thailand). I am going to move over to this article from The Daily Mail, again that is dailymail.co.uk, the article is titled: COVID rules are blamed for 23% dive in young children's development: disturbing study shows scores in three key cognitive tests slumped between 2018 and 2021, with face mask rules among possible culprits. Then they have bullet points: I like the Daily Mail because they kind of do this bullet point thing and there is the whole article. I urge those who are watching this video, as always go check out all this stuff in detail. Go read it for yourself, it is interesting stuff. Again, dailymail.co.uk. Down these bullet points:

• Face mask and other social distancing measures may in fact impede on children's development, a new study executed by Brown University has found

• The probe analyzed the cognitive development of the youngsters through infancy, childhood and adolescence

• In the study, researchers first analyzed 1070 assessments administered on 605 kids prior to March 2020, when COVID lockdowns and masking began

• A further 154 assessments from 118 kids administered between March 2020 and June 2021, during the height of the pandemic, were then carried out

• Thirty-nine children born in 2018 and 2019 were analyzed over the course of the pandemic, into 2021

And this is where it gets interesting:

• The report found that there was a 23% drop in scores measuring kids' intelligence quotients since the start of the pandemic

I say that again: "The report found that there was a 23% drop in scores measuring kids' intelligence quotients since the start of the pandemic"

Quoting further:

• The study also found similar dips in the same span in regards to developing children's ability to communicate, both verbally and through subtle facial cues"

Yeah, kids learn by seeing people's face; that's how they learn language. It is an integral part of it. Now I am not a pedagogical expert, I am not a PhD in education but there is common sense out there. I mean this is kind of one of those things that like our grandparents knew implicitly that yeah you don't cover your face when you are talking to kids; they need to see your face, that's why you play peekaboo kind of thing is you are hidden and then you are not hidden because kids need to see your face to be socialized, to become socialized, to become acclimated to living in a social environment.

So I think at this point, especially in the context of this whole thing, the benefits appear to me to be minuscule to the point of being so discreet that they exist on like a Nano level, and some of the costs especially when you consider a 23% and I quote: "23% dive in young children's development", that's a pretty big cost. So if we are doing a cost/benefit analysis I just can't see where one can honestly say that having guidance that really so heavily encourages usage of these things that people almost feel like it's mandatory, I don't think that's a good idea. It doesn't make sense to me from a public health standpoint, from a public policy standpoint because quite honestly and based on what we now know, the data just isn't there.