Neanderthals vs. "Science"

What sorcery is this? Are you trying to suggest that adding regulation from government is just fine as long as it adds spending to the economy?

Because we could go down a rabbit hole on the climate that would be great for the economy, and horrible for the world.

If a large majority of the population is sick and the remainder is too scared to leave their homes due to a high prevalence of a infectious disease -- then it is obvious this is not good for the economy. Go take a look at Brazil.

Following the proper public health practices when dealing with a pandemic is the fastest way to have your economy rebound in a robust manner.

Every day in country with widespread sickness due to not following the best public health practices such as wearing masks is a day effectively lost to the economy.
 
Last edited:
If you were really fact checking me you would look at the Danish and CDC studies at least one of which you lied about multiple times.

You would go to those threads... and see for yourself that mask wearing people got Covid at the same rate as the non mask wearing people.


your studies in the past have been garbage meta studies where you can not separate out distancing, immunity and climate.


Let's fact check the nonsense you constantly peddle...

Fact check: CDC study links mask mandates to slowing COVID-19 infections and deaths
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-mandates-slowed-covid-infections/6938262002/

The claim: CDC study found that face masks have a negligible effect on the spread of COVID-19
A new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found a link between face mask mandates and a reduction in COVID-19 cases and deaths, but at least one widely shared report wrongly interprets that data.

One America News Network on March 7 published an article under the headline “CDC: Face masks don’t prevent COVID-19, study finds masks have negligible impact on coronavirus numbers.” The post claims “the CDC has admitted face masks do little to prevent the spread of COVID-19 amid mounting pressure to lift mask mandates across the U.S.”

But the CDC’s study doesn’t say that. In fact, it doesn't study mask efficacy at all. Instead, it links mask mandates to “statistically significant decreases in county-level daily COVID-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days of implementation.”

“Over the course of the pandemic, the scientific evidence and our understanding of masks have grown. The data we now have conclusively show that widespread use of masks is a very effective way to reduce the spread of COVID-19,” CDC spokeswoman Jasmine Reed wrote in an email to USA TODAY.

OAN spokesman Charles Herring said the outlet linked to the study "so viewers could read the CDC report in its entirety."

What exactly was the CDC studying?
Reed said the CDC's report “did not examine the effectiveness of masks.”

Instead, it analyzed the connection between mask mandate policies and the rate of new county-level coronavirus cases and deaths. It also examined the link between allowing on-site restaurant dining and the number of coronavirus cases and deaths.

The study used county-level data from March 1 through Dec. 31 of last year, comparing data from before mandates took effect to the time period when they were in place.

While it controlled for other policies that have been used to try to mitigate new infections from the coronavirus – including bar closures, stay-at-home orders and bans on gatherings of 10 or more people – it did not account for some others, such as physical distancing recommendations and other types of business closures.

The study also did not measure compliance with and enforcement of mask mandates and prohibitions on dining at restaurants.

“What they’re looking at here is efficacy of mask mandates. They’re not looking at masks in and of themselves," Josh Petrie, research professor in the University of Michigan's School of Public Health, told USA TODAY. "They don’t know how well people complied with these mandates or what proportion of the population was actually wearing masks.”

"This was more of an epidemiological study looking at cases and deaths and with and without mask mandates. That’s what this study was pursuing to try to answer," said Michael Bisesi, vice dean and interim chair of environmental health sciences in Ohio State University's College of Public Health.

What did the study find?
The authors found that the growth rate of new coronavirus cases and deaths dropped after mask mandates were put in place.

In the first 20 days after implementing mask mandates, new cases slowed by 0.5 percentage points. They continued to fall over the 100 days analyzed in the study. COVID-19 death rates dropped by 0.7 percentage points in the first 20 days after masks were required.

Decreases in the rate of new infections and deaths from the virus were statistically significant, the study’s authors found.

“Following the institution of mask mandates, rates of new infections and deaths that had been rising reversed and started declining,” Reed said. “Immediately after these mandates were instituted, these declines were statistically significant.”

The study also found a statistically significant increase in the rate of COVID-19 infections and deaths starting 40 days after indoor or outdoor dining at restaurants was allowed.

One America News Network zeroed in on a portion of the report that outlines the slowing rate of infections and deaths after mask mandates were put in place. That section finishes: "Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period."

But the "reference period" is defined by the report as the 20 days before mask mandates started. That period is used as the benchmark against which researchers compared days 21 through 60 before mask mandates were adopted and the 100 days after.

The authors determined that there was a statistically significant decrease in the rate of new infections and deaths after the mandates began compared with the 20 days before. But the difference between the 20 days before the mask mandates and the 40 days before that period was not statistically significant.

Herring dismissed those results, claiming unnamed experts told the news network that the reductions in spread the study found were not significant.

Experts interviewed by USA TODAY said the One America News Network had "misinterpreted" or "mischaracterized" the findings of the CDC study.

"Their perspective on the study and results to me are contrary to what was stated in the actual study itself," Bisesi said. “I just don’t know based on reading the OAN summary how they came to the same conclusions because the CDC conclusions were favorable.”

Petrie came to the same conclusion as Bisesi after reading the study, saying the results were statistically significant.

What do other studies say about mask mandates?
The CDC's report is the latest in a growing body of evidence establishing mask mandates as an effective strategy in curbing the virus.

Data released by the agency in November looking at COVID-19 incidence in Kansas after a statewide mask mandate also found the measure resulted in a drop in infectious cases. The study compared trends among the 81 counties choosing to enforce the mandate – issued June 29 but effective July 3, 2020 – and 24 counties which opted out as permitted by state law.

Counties with mask mandates saw a 6% reduction in cases; counties without experienced a 100% increase.

While the downtrend could also have been a result of other countermeasures like social distancing, Kansas' findings mirror observations from other states and countries.

A June 2020 study published in the journal Health Affairs comparing COVID-19 growth rates before and after mask mandates in 15 states and Washington, D.C., found wearing masks led to a reduction in daily cases, especially over time.

Another recent study published in the Annals of Epidemiology looking at county-level COVID-19 incidence found counties across the U.S. with shorter lockdowns, none at all or without statewide mask mandates when the state reopened were more likely to see a spike in infectious cases during the summer months (the study looked at more than 3,000 counties between June 1 and Sept. 30).

And in the German city of Jena, first in the country to implement public mask wearing last April, masks led to a 75% decrease in new COVID-19 cases in little under three weeks, one December study found.

Fact check: Masks and vaccines are effective at combating COVID-19 spread

Our rating: False
The claim that a CDC study found face masks to have a negligible effect on the spread of COVID-19 is FALSE. The study referenced in the One America News Network report says the opposite, noting that mask mandates were linked to “statistically significant decreases” in COVID-19 case within 20 days of implementation.

Our fact-check sources:
 
If you were really fact checking me you would look at the Danish and CDC studies at least one of which you lied about multiple times.

You would go to those threads... and see for yourself that mask wearing people got Covid at the same rate as the non mask wearing people.


your studies in the past have been garbage meta studies where you can not separate out distancing, immunity and climate.

Good luck with your fantasies.

Bottom line: Wearing masks and mask mandates stop the spread of COVID.
 
good luck continuing to being a lying asswipe who denies facts and science...

as I said 6000 person study, 3000 person control group.

Danish study finds no clear evidence face masks protect wearer from Covid-19 infection - The Local


A major Danish study has found face masks give no clear protection from Covid-19 infection to the wearer, but did not examine whether the wearer protects others by using the item.

Once again the entire purpose of non-medical face masks is to stop you from infecting others. Across a community this greatly reduces Covid spread when there is high compliance. How many times does this need to be stated before it sinks into your thick head.
 
Once again... in the past you have posted articles stating masks protect the wearer.

Once again I remind you that we saw that 71 percent of Americans think masks protect the wearer.

Finally... you never produce proof that most mask even prevent the spread in real life.


All you have is some meta studies and Tsing's graphs show just the opposite.
So... you have very little proof on your side that overall masks prevent the spread.



I don't deny triple layered masks and n 95s may work in labs when breathing straight through them.


But real life is different. They get dirty. People breathe around the masks.
Covid gets on the outside of masks.
They encourage people to do risky things.
And many masks are garbage.



Once again the entire purpose of non-medical face masks is to stop you from infecting others. Across a community this greatly reduces Covid spread when there is high compliance. How many times does this need to be stated before it sinks into your thick head.
 
Once again... in the past you have posted articles stating masks protect the wearer.

Once again I remind you that we saw that 71 percent of Americans think masks protect the wearer.

Finally... you never produce proof that most mask even prevent the spread in real life.


All you have is some meta studies and Tsing's graphs show just the opposite.
So... you have very little proof on your side that overall masks prevent the spread.



I don't deny triple layered masks and n 95s may work in labs when breathing straight through them.


But real life is different. They get dirty. People breathe around the masks.
Covid gets on the outside of masks.
They encourage people to do risky things.
And many masks are garbage.

Once again you are misrepresenting what I have stated. The studies I posted show that basic non N-95 masks are very effective have stopping the transmission of COVID to others but not very effective in stopping you from catching COVID from someone else when wearing them. The numbers in the studies have shown in or around 85% effective in stopping the transmission of COVID but only 15% effective at best stopping you from catching COVID from others. I defy you to find a post where I stated that non N-95 masks were very effective at stopping a person from catching COVID from others.

In order to be effective as a proper public health measure to stop the spread of COVID the wearing of masks require a high compliance across the community to stop the transmission. I have reinforced this point many times.

There is plenty of proof in practical reality proven by studies and in laboratory studies that mask mandates and the wholesale wearing of masks greatly decreases the spread of COVID. Anti-maskers are basically desiring that society and businesses should be locked down for a longer time -- because this is the result of non-compliance.
 
before I posted what I did... I made sure I remembered correctly.
you literally posted an article in which the CDC said masks protect the wearer.

look it up yourself.

Once again you are misrepresenting what I have stated. The studies I posted show that basic non N-95 masks are very effective have stopping the transmission of COVID to others but not very effective in stopping you from catching COVID from someone else when wearing them. The numbers in the studies have shown in or around 85% effective in stopping the transmission of COVID but only 15% effective at best stopping you from catching COVID from others. I defy you to find a post where I stated that non N-95 masks were very effective at stopping a person from catching COVID from others.

In order to be effective as a proper public health measure to stop the spread of COVID the wearing of masks require a high compliance across the community to stop the transmission. I have reinforced this point many times.

There is plenty of proof in practical reality proven by studies and in laboratory studies that mask mandates and the wholesale wearing of masks greatly decreases the spread of COVID. Anti-maskers are basically desiring that society and businesses should be locked down for a longer time -- because this is the result of non-compliance.
 
before I posted what I did... I made sure.
you literally posted an article in which the CDC said masks protect the wearer.

look it up yourself.

First find the link and prove it.

And second I have posted articles that have provided all sorts of information over time. Just because a single article may have one paragraph that states this — it does not make it my assertion. Find me the quote where I personally asserted that non-N95 masks are effective in stopping a person from catching Covid from another person.
 
Last edited:
EyPtOdDWYAEDVg5
 
Back
Top