This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research Article
Corona children studies "Co-Ki": First results of a Germany-wide registry on mouth and nose covering (mask) in children
David Martin
University of Witten/Herdecke
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Declarations:
Declarations
- This study involved human subjects.
- The author confirmed that all appropriate ethical guidelines for the use of human subjects have been followed, any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee review has been obtained, and information about the IRB/ethics committee is included in the manuscript.
- The author has confirmed that all necessary patient/participant consent or assent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. If the IRB/ethics committee waived the requirement for patient/participant consent or assent, an explanation for the waiver is included in the text.
- The author has confirmed that a statement listing potential conflicts of interest or lack thereof is included in the text.
View Research Highlight
Research Highlight
created by Research Square
Background: The use of masks, together with other precautionary measures, significantly reduces the spread of COVID-19 infection; however, the effects of masks on children have not been widely studied.
Methods: The attitudes and observations of parents, doctors, and educators regarding the effects of mask-wearing on children and adolescents were collected using an online registry. Analyses focused on the responses of parents, the majority (87.7%) of study respondents.
Results: The majority of respondents (>65%) indicated that children complained of impairments and that they directly observed impairments in children that they attributed to wearing masks. Symptoms reported by respondents included physical (rashes, headaches, etc.), mental (fears, irritability, etc.) and intellectual (concentration and learning) impairments. Most respondents (73.3%) indicated some level of disagreement with existing mask guidelines.
Conclusions and Limitations: As measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 continue to be implemented, more research is needed to assess the risks and benefits of mask wearing in children. The limitations of this study include potential sampling bias, reporting bias, and confounding bias as well as lack of a control group.
View Research Highlight
Background: Narratives about complaints in children and adolescents caused by wearing a mask are accumulating. There is, to date, no registry for side effects of masks.
Methods: At the University of Witten/Herdecke an online registry has been set up where parents, doctors, pedagogues and others can enter their observations. On 20.10.2020, 363 doctors were asked to make entries and to make parents and teachers aware of the registry.
Results: By 26.10.2020 the registry had been used by 20,353 people. In this publication we report the results from the parents, who entered data on a total of 25,930 children. The average wearing time of the mask was 270 minutes per day. Impairments caused by wearing the mask were reported by 68% of the parents. These included irritability (60%), headache (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), less happiness (49%), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%), malaise (42%) impaired learning (38%) and drowsiness or fatigue (37%).
Discussion: This world's first registry for recording the effects of wearing masks in children is dedicated to a new research question. Bias with respect to preferential documentation of children who are particularly severely affected or who are fundamentally critical of protective measures cannot be dismissed. The frequency of the registry’s use and the spectrum of symptoms registryed indicate the importance of the topic and call for representative surveys, randomized controlled trials with various masks and a renewed risk-benefit assessment for the vulnerable group of children: adults need to collecticely reflect the circumstances under which they would be willing to take a residual risk upon themselves in favor of enabling children to have a higher quality of life without having to wear a mask.
Keywords
Mouth and nose protection, community masks, mask obligation, pediatrics, COVID-19
Figure 1
Sam McLone
commented on 05 January, 2021
Bigtree's video should be ignored, that goes for all the other ones that use the "stick a sensor in a mask and take a reading" videos. They are invariably using sensors that will not operate in the environment under a mask, and that will not operate in the varying pressure under a mask.
Sam McLone
commented on 05 January, 2021
They didn't measure anything. The sensors they are attempting to use will not read accurately in the humidity under the mask. The sensors will also not work in the vary pressure of the mask when the person is inhaling and exhaling. They are using sensors that are not designed for that purpose and they are not familiar with the sensing technology and also not technologically literate enough to read the manual and realize they won't work for that.
Vero Sercanto
commented on 05 January, 2021
Were there any mentions of how the mask causes irritation to the skin. I get this after barely an hours use of the mask to the point I want to take it off.
Jeaneen
commented on 05 January, 2021
No one will listen! I sometimes think they like wearing masks!
Matthew Hurst
commented on 06 January, 2021
I am glad to see this study. The use of masks has bothered me for two reasons: 1) Potential Cognitive Harm: Randomized, Controlled studies on slightly elevated CO2 levels of 1000 to 2500 ppm show significant decreases in cognitive functioning. The long-term implications for this are unclear. 2) Little to no Benefit: Non-medical masks have been shown to block droplets, but actually increase fine aerosol emissions. Even medical grade surgical masks are equivocal in randomized, controlled studies. The masks seem more designed to show something is being done than to actually reduce virus transmission. It seems that the health of school children is possibly being harmed to give the appearance of doing something. References: CO2: 1) News Article on This Study: Savchuk, K. "Your Brain on Carbon Dioxide: Research Finds Even Low Levels of Indoor CO2 Impair Thinking." California Magazine (2016). https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/summer-2016-welcome-there/your-brain-carbon-dioxide-research-finds-even-low 2) Satish, U., Mendell, M., et al. Is CO2 an Indoor Pollutant? Direct Effects of Low-to-Moderate CO2 Concentrations on Human Decision-Making Performance Environmental Health Perspectives, 120:12 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104789. 3) Allen, J.G., MacNaughton, P.et al. Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office Environments. Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol 124, No 6, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510037 Lack of Effectiveness: 4) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3349234
Steve Katasi
commented on 06 January, 2021
Table 2 Table Headings need correction, as each column has the (Total age group) heading
Robert
commented on 06 January, 2021
you should fire your safety officers, because their measuring methodology is wrong and amateuristic. If you breath out, theres a lack of oxygen in your mouth and behind the mask. When you breath in, new air is attracted due to vaccuum and mixed with the air in your mouth and behind the mask to your lungs where is comes together. In the lungs the air mixes. From the oxygen in your lungs approx 30% is used, the rest is exhaled again. p.s. fire your safety officers
Sam McLone
commented on 06 January, 2021
They didn't do anything. They didn't get any legitimate measurements. All videos made by putting a tester designed for testing ambient conditions in a room (Bigtree) or confined spaces (the other "osha expert" dude and the firefighter) are meaningless. The sensors in the testers will not operate in conditions under a mask. They are not rated to operate with those levels of humidity present, and the changing pressure and air flow under a mask. They are all useless. The people making them are either not technically literate enough to interpret the manuals for the devices, or they are creating fake news to drive their loony conspiracy theories.
Patty
commented on 08 January, 2021
Ellen, your claim that requiring masks is destroying civilization is quite the hyperbole. Most of the inconveniences of masks pale in comparison to this horrible virus. If there’s even a small chance for protection from doing the simple thing of wearing a mask when around other people, I’ll gladly wear one. As far as your valid point about young children learning speech, deaf people who read lips, etc, clear masks are readily available
Simon
commented on 13 January, 2021
Excellent comment. I would love to share in my private network and via Librti network. Thanks.
Anonymous
commented on 15 January, 2021
https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/faqs#collapse3-7 "Some people have mistakenly claimed that OSHA standards (e.g., the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR 1910.134; the Permit-Required Confined Space standard 29 CFR 1910.146; and the Air Contaminants standard, 29 CFR 1910.1000) apply to the issue of oxygen or carbon dioxide levels resulting from the use of medical masks or cloth face coverings in work settings with normal ambient air (e.g. healthcare settings, offices, retail settings, construction). These standards do not apply to the wearing of medical masks or cloth face coverings in work settings with normal ambient air). These standards would only apply to work settings where there are known or suspected sources of chemicals (e.g., manufacturing facilities) or workers are required to enter a potentially dangerous location (e.g., a large tank or vessel)."
Kathryn Young
commented on 16 January, 2021
Thanks for speaking up!
Kathryn Young
commented on 16 January, 2021
Thank you.
Mat Sommerfeld
commented on 18 January, 2021
Spot on sir, thank you for taking a stand against this mandated child abuse.
4 comments flagged for moderation
If you posted a comment and think it was mistakenly removed, please contact customer support at [email protected].
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 2
Posted 05 Jan, 2021
Community comments: 14
Community comments: 16
Metrics
Comments: 14
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
Learn more about our company.
This is a preprint. It has not completed peer review.
Research Article
Corona children studies "Co-Ki": First results of a Germany-wide registry on mouth and nose covering (mask) in children
David Martin
University of Witten/Herdecke
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 2
Posted 05 Jan, 2021
Community comments: 14
Community comments: 16
Metrics
Comments: 14
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Declarations:
Declarations
- This study involved human subjects.
- The author confirmed that all appropriate ethical guidelines for the use of human subjects have been followed, any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee review has been obtained, and information about the IRB/ethics committee is included in the manuscript.
- The author has confirmed that all necessary patient/participant consent or assent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. If the IRB/ethics committee waived the requirement for patient/participant consent or assent, an explanation for the waiver is included in the text.
- The author has confirmed that a statement listing potential conflicts of interest or lack thereof is included in the text.
View Research Highlight
Research Highlight
created by Research Square
Background: The use of masks, together with other precautionary measures, significantly reduces the spread of COVID-19 infection; however, the effects of masks on children have not been widely studied.
Methods: The attitudes and observations of parents, doctors, and educators regarding the effects of mask-wearing on children and adolescents were collected using an online registry. Analyses focused on the responses of parents, the majority (87.7%) of study respondents.
Results: The majority of respondents (>65%) indicated that children complained of impairments and that they directly observed impairments in children that they attributed to wearing masks. Symptoms reported by respondents included physical (rashes, headaches, etc.), mental (fears, irritability, etc.) and intellectual (concentration and learning) impairments. Most respondents (73.3%) indicated some level of disagreement with existing mask guidelines.
Conclusions and Limitations: As measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 continue to be implemented, more research is needed to assess the risks and benefits of mask wearing in children. The limitations of this study include potential sampling bias, reporting bias, and confounding bias as well as lack of a control group.
View Research Highlight
Background: Narratives about complaints in children and adolescents caused by wearing a mask are accumulating. There is, to date, no registry for side effects of masks.
Methods: At the University of Witten/Herdecke an online registry has been set up where parents, doctors, pedagogues and others can enter their observations. On 20.10.2020, 363 doctors were asked to make entries and to make parents and teachers aware of the registry.
Results: By 26.10.2020 the registry had been used by 20,353 people. In this publication we report the results from the parents, who entered data on a total of 25,930 children. The average wearing time of the mask was 270 minutes per day. Impairments caused by wearing the mask were reported by 68% of the parents. These included irritability (60%), headache (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), less happiness (49%), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%), malaise (42%) impaired learning (38%) and drowsiness or fatigue (37%).
Discussion: This world's first registry for recording the effects of wearing masks in children is dedicated to a new research question. Bias with respect to preferential documentation of children who are particularly severely affected or who are fundamentally critical of protective measures cannot be dismissed. The frequency of the registry’s use and the spectrum of symptoms registryed indicate the importance of the topic and call for representative surveys, randomized controlled trials with various masks and a renewed risk-benefit assessment for the vulnerable group of children: adults need to collecticely reflect the circumstances under which they would be willing to take a residual risk upon themselves in favor of enabling children to have a higher quality of life without having to wear a mask.
Figure 1
Sam McLone
commented on 05 January, 2021
Bigtree's video should be ignored, that goes for all the other ones that use the "stick a sensor in a mask and take a reading" videos. They are invariably using sensors that will not operate in the environment under a mask, and that will not operate in the varying pressure under a mask.
Sam McLone
commented on 05 January, 2021
They didn't measure anything. The sensors they are attempting to use will not read accurately in the humidity under the mask. The sensors will also not work in the vary pressure of the mask when the person is inhaling and exhaling. They are using sensors that are not designed for that purpose and they are not familiar with the sensing technology and also not technologically literate enough to read the manual and realize they won't work for that.
Vero Sercanto
commented on 05 January, 2021
Were there any mentions of how the mask causes irritation to the skin. I get this after barely an hours use of the mask to the point I want to take it off.
Jeaneen
commented on 05 January, 2021
No one will listen! I sometimes think they like wearing masks!
Matthew Hurst
commented on 06 January, 2021
I am glad to see this study. The use of masks has bothered me for two reasons: 1) Potential Cognitive Harm: Randomized, Controlled studies on slightly elevated CO2 levels of 1000 to 2500 ppm show significant decreases in cognitive functioning. The long-term implications for this are unclear. 2) Little to no Benefit: Non-medical masks have been shown to block droplets, but actually increase fine aerosol emissions. Even medical grade surgical masks are equivocal in randomized, controlled studies. The masks seem more designed to show something is being done than to actually reduce virus transmission. It seems that the health of school children is possibly being harmed to give the appearance of doing something. References: CO2: 1) News Article on This Study: Savchuk, K. "Your Brain on Carbon Dioxide: Research Finds Even Low Levels of Indoor CO2 Impair Thinking." California Magazine (2016). https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/summer-2016-welcome-there/your-brain-carbon-dioxide-research-finds-even-low 2) Satish, U., Mendell, M., et al. Is CO2 an Indoor Pollutant? Direct Effects of Low-to-Moderate CO2 Concentrations on Human Decision-Making Performance Environmental Health Perspectives, 120:12 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104789. 3) Allen, J.G., MacNaughton, P.et al. Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office Environments. Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol 124, No 6, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510037 Lack of Effectiveness: 4) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3349234
Steve Katasi
commented on 06 January, 2021
Table 2 Table Headings need correction, as each column has the (Total age group) heading
Robert
commented on 06 January, 2021
you should fire your safety officers, because their measuring methodology is wrong and amateuristic. If you breath out, theres a lack of oxygen in your mouth and behind the mask. When you breath in, new air is attracted due to vaccuum and mixed with the air in your mouth and behind the mask to your lungs where is comes together. In the lungs the air mixes. From the oxygen in your lungs approx 30% is used, the rest is exhaled again. p.s. fire your safety officers
Sam McLone
commented on 06 January, 2021
They didn't do anything. They didn't get any legitimate measurements. All videos made by putting a tester designed for testing ambient conditions in a room (Bigtree) or confined spaces (the other "osha expert" dude and the firefighter) are meaningless. The sensors in the testers will not operate in conditions under a mask. They are not rated to operate with those levels of humidity present, and the changing pressure and air flow under a mask. They are all useless. The people making them are either not technically literate enough to interpret the manuals for the devices, or they are creating fake news to drive their loony conspiracy theories.
Patty
commented on 08 January, 2021
Ellen, your claim that requiring masks is destroying civilization is quite the hyperbole. Most of the inconveniences of masks pale in comparison to this horrible virus. If there’s even a small chance for protection from doing the simple thing of wearing a mask when around other people, I’ll gladly wear one. As far as your valid point about young children learning speech, deaf people who read lips, etc, clear masks are readily available
Simon
commented on 13 January, 2021
Excellent comment. I would love to share in my private network and via Librti network. Thanks.
Anonymous
commented on 15 January, 2021
https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/faqs#collapse3-7 "Some people have mistakenly claimed that OSHA standards (e.g., the Respiratory Protection standard, 29 CFR 1910.134; the Permit-Required Confined Space standard 29 CFR 1910.146; and the Air Contaminants standard, 29 CFR 1910.1000) apply to the issue of oxygen or carbon dioxide levels resulting from the use of medical masks or cloth face coverings in work settings with normal ambient air (e.g. healthcare settings, offices, retail settings, construction). These standards do not apply to the wearing of medical masks or cloth face coverings in work settings with normal ambient air). These standards would only apply to work settings where there are known or suspected sources of chemicals (e.g., manufacturing facilities) or workers are required to enter a potentially dangerous location (e.g., a large tank or vessel)."
Kathryn Young
commented on 16 January, 2021
Thanks for speaking up!
Kathryn Young
commented on 16 January, 2021
Thank you.
Mat Sommerfeld
commented on 18 January, 2021
Spot on sir, thank you for taking a stand against this mandated child abuse.