https://rationalground.com/post-thanksgiving-mask-charts-still-no-evidence-that-masks-work/
Very interesting data in here.
Very interesting data in here.
Post Thanksgiving mask charts
5,612 Views |
36 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by nortex97
At first glance, that appears to just be using mask requirements as a milestone but not incorporating mask compliance. Am I missing something?
Is this saying that masks don't work or mask mandates don't work (those are two very different things) and what does this have to do with Thanksgiving?
The European graph has mask participation estimates.chris1515 said:
At first glance, that appears to just be using mask requirements as a milestone but not incorporating mask compliance. Am I missing something?
Post Thanksgiving.
What exactly is mask participation? Last weekend i was out shopping with my wife in plano. About 50% of the people were wearing masks outdoors as they strolled along the shops which i found odd. We stopped to eat dinner at a mexican restaurant and sat outdoors under the heat lamps. I watched people coming up to the restaurant wearing a mask outdoors, only to be lead inside and sit in booths maskless for an hour with other people coming and goin sitting in other booths next to them while they ate and drank. I assume they would be called mask participants however no mask is going protect anyone when you take it off, laugh, eat, drink etc. while your head is 2 feet away from the people behind you. You can argue about masks all night and day...bring up science and run stats but if you aren't actually wearing the mask when you are in close indoor contact with other people it won't work. Wearing a mask to HEB to grab some cookies for you aunt mary's bday party is great and all...but when you take the mask off and spend a few hours inside mary's house with 15 other folks its not going to help.Clob94 said:The European graph has mask participation estimates.chris1515 said:
At first glance, that appears to just be using mask requirements as a milestone but not incorporating mask compliance. Am I missing something?
Masks work! If they're not working it's because people aren't doing it right because..... masks work!
That's exactly what I said.GAC06 said:
Masks work! If they're not working it's because people aren't doing it right because..... masks work!
It's what I said
I think it w/o question shows mask mandates are not helping. We also know that many of these places have mask compliance at 80-90% or better. In SoCal I've not seen anyone inside w/o a mask in six months.JesusQuintana said:
Is this saying that masks don't work or mask mandates don't work (those are two very different things) and what does this have to do with Thanksgiving?
Now, does everyone handle it properly? Not at all. It's like handing a 15 year old keys to a car and expecting they'd drive perfect. Healthcare providers have at a minimum some training of handling their PPE. This has to be a factor in lack of success.
Additionally, Covid is transmitted in huge numbers in homes. Masks in homes would really be needed for masks to be effective if they worked.
Agree. That's what I observed in my other post. Wearing a mask to your table or seat at the bar and then removing while u eat or drink makes little sense to me but where I live that "mask compliant". Kinda like wearing a condom during foreplay but tossing it when it's time to giddy up.
Interesting info and I'm no mask crusader. However, there may be a bias in this information. For instance, states with more cases would be more likely to institute mask policies than those that don't have them. So the fact that Montana, for instance, isn't using masks would not make a good comparison to Connecticut that is using masks. The other confounding factor is population density. States with more population density are more likely to be Democratically led and have mask mandates. You would also expect more cases in those states than in a less population dense state.
So I don't think this data is any sort of proof that masks are ineffective. It does show that we have no proof of mask effectiveness on a population scale. All the good information on masks is in labs or small studies.
So I don't think this data is any sort of proof that masks are ineffective. It does show that we have no proof of mask effectiveness on a population scale. All the good information on masks is in labs or small studies.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Mask mandates are not the same as mask usage. But it's pretty obvious that mask mandates do not result in proper mask usage. It could even be that mask mandates make people feel less susceptible and therefore more likely to engage in riskier activities.GAC06 said:
Masks work! If they're not working it's because people aren't doing it right because..... masks work!
I was told we would all be dead by now due to the thanksgiving spike. We still on?
OldArmyBrent said:Mask mandates are not the same as mask usage. But it's pretty obvious that mask mandates do not result in proper mask usage. It could even be that mask mandates make people feel less susceptible and therefore more likely to engage in riskier activities.GAC06 said:
Masks work! If they're not working it's because people aren't doing it right because..... masks work!
You could have just quoted my post instead of rephrasing. Masks work but if they don't it's because people aren't wearing them right because masks work.
The point I was making was that mandates don't work. I don't want to argue about whether masks work. I imagine they do, but no one is using them correctly as it is basically impossible to do so.
rudy99 said:
I was told we would all be dead by now due to the thanksgiving spike. We still on?
Some of y'all are trying real hard to pretend 3000 deaths a day and increasing is insignificant. But yeah let's ignore that because people definitely claimed everyone would die.
Some of y'all are trying too hard to tie every death to corona. It's sickening. Contagious? You damn right. The sole killer and reason to react like we have reacted?Gordo14 said:rudy99 said:
I was told we would all be dead by now due to the thanksgiving spike. We still on?
Some of y'all are trying real hard to pretend 3000 deaths a day and increasing is insignificant. But yeah let's ignore that because people definitely claimed everyone would die.
Makes you think.
Quote:
The work presents complementary lines of evidence from the fields of pathology and history of medicine to support this conclusion. "The weight of evidence we examined from both historical and modern analyses of the 1918 influenza pandemic favors a scenario in which viral damage followed by bacterial pneumonia led to the vast majority of deaths," says co-author NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. "In essence, the virus landed the first blow while bacteria delivered the knockout punch."
Even without the eyeroll-inducing facebook graphic, this is idiotic. Masks did not cause deaths during the 1918 pandemic. Get off facebook.
CDub06 said:
Even without the eyeroll-inducing facebook graphic, this is idiotic. Masks did not cause deaths during the 1918 pandemic. Get off facebook.
Here is the full article being referenced for those interested. No hits when I search the article for "mask".
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599911
I thought it was well established that few people die of the flu but rather from the opportunistic infections that can come along with it. Simar to how few people die from the blunt force trauma of getting shot but from bleeding to death, organ failure, CNS damage, etc
And that the same thing can happen with Covid-19.
Damn that was a lot of typos
And that the same thing can happen with Covid-19.
Damn that was a lot of typos
It's scary someone can post a facebook-chain-mail-graphic like that and not question the source.
You really start to realize how easily people can be duped.
You really start to realize how easily people can be duped.
Medical professionals everywhere coming down with mask cancer. I heard on facebook.
Please post Kansas results of mask vs, no mask counties.
That thread is at the top of the board here now, and is absolutely not demonstrative of an impact as to spread of covid/deaths.revvie said:
Please post Kansas results of mask vs, no mask counties.
Another good piece, discussing a Mayo study on masks/ILI viruses. "Do masks work?"
Quote:
The real question, of course, is whether mask mandates work. And experience shows that they don't. In state after state and country after country, it is impossible to see any positive impact on case, hospitalization, or fatality statistics when mask mandates go into effect.
Our political leaders blame that fact on us. Whiny governors like Minnesota's Tim Walz suggest that since his mask mandate hasn't had the intended effect, the rest of us must be letting him down by failing to wear our masks. But the best evidence we have indicates that compliance with mask mandates is well over 90% across the country, and still there is little or no evidence that they make any difference. So the question is squarely posed: do masks work, or don't they?
The Mayo Clinic wrote just before Thanksgiving that its research had confirmed the value of mask wearing: "Mayo Clinic research confirms critical role of masks in preventing COVID-19 infection." A bold claim! But what did that research consist of?
...
Mayo's experiment convinces me that if someone with COVID is standing a few feet away from you and sneezes directly at you, it would be good if he were wearing a mask. Then, too, it would be good if he covered his mouth when he sneezes. Would that produce a droplet pattern much different from wearing a mask?
This experiment helps to explain, I think, why at the same time, public health officials exhort us to wear masks, while, in instance after instance, mask mandates make no perceptible difference in the spread of the coronavirus. Mask mania is driven by the human need to believe that we are "doing something," along with the more modern need to believe that our government is "doing something." It is beyond the pale to ask whether there is, in fact, much that any government can do about respiratory viruses.
Government's current campaign against the coronavirus reminds me of the Ford administration's anti-inflation campaign of the 1970s. President Ford urged Americans to wear "WIN" buttons, standing for "Whip Inflation Now." How any citizen not a member of the Federal Reserve was going to "whip inflation" was anyone's guess. Wearing a mask, in my opinion, is only slightly more effective than wearing a WIN button, and is done mostly for the same reasons, i.e. 1) obedience to authority, and 2) virtue signaling, although that term was not known in 1974.
Somebody should overlay all these graphs with the number of tests performed and i am confident youll find the greatest contributor for number of cases, regardless of the stupid masks.
“You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me.”
- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Proposition Joe said:
It's scary someone can post a facebook-chain-mail-graphic like that and not question the source.
You really start to realize how easily people can be duped.
Yep. Pervasive (and addictive) social media echo chambers probably don't help.
Masks are not science-based. The CDC (and Fauci) have known this all along about upper respiratory viruses and symptomatic transmission.
What's scary is the use of social media/propaganda press to feed a religious belief/confidence in fake/bad science about the efficacy of paper masks to prevent the spread of a relatively minor ILI virus.
https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/cdc-quietly-changes-covid-guidelines-to-say-masks-don-t-workQuote:
"The CDC quietly updated their guidelines to say that masks don't work if you've come into close contact with someone for 15 minutes or more, according to the CDC website.
"The media is almost completely ignoring this fact.
"According to the CDC, anyone who has symptoms or tests positive is a risk to others even if masks are worn."
Disinfectant works.
But at least the masks keep your face warm in the winter.
What's scary is the use of social media/propaganda press to feed a religious belief/confidence in fake/bad science about the efficacy of paper masks to prevent the spread of a relatively minor ILI virus.
Common sense dictates that masks help. To what extent they help and it's significance is probably not very high.
PPE clearly works. Just look at the incidence of infection in HC settings facing the epidemic vs the gen pop.
But the PPE the public is still predominantly using, well I have my doubts. We've over fetishized the simple ritual of masking.
Once we hit the cold weather I went from surgical mask to N95.
But the PPE the public is still predominantly using, well I have my doubts. We've over fetishized the simple ritual of masking.
Once we hit the cold weather I went from surgical mask to N95.
minor ILI relative to what?
Historical ILI trends in the country (really, the whole northern hemisphere).cone said:
minor ILI relative to what?
They're trying to break out all the covid19 stuff separately this year, but historically coronaviruses are tracked by ilinet.
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/main.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/purpose-methods.html
ILI case definition
An acute respiratory infection with:
- measured fever of 38 C
- and cough;
- with onset within the last 10 days.
Featured Stories
See All
16:13
32m ago
513
11:13
17h ago
1.9k
6:46
13h ago
3.7k
Janneh's injury pops A&M's bubble hopes at SEC Tournament
by Kay Naegeli
9:46
12h ago
1.4k
Lessentine tosses complete game in run-rule of Louisiana Tech
by Kayla Gaither
14:04
59m ago
455