"During March 1–December 31, 2020, state-issued mask mandates applied in 2,313 (73.6%) of the 3,142 U.S. counties. Mask mandates were associated with a 0.5 percentage point decrease (p = 0.02) in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.1, 1.5, 1.7, and 1.8 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all) (Table 1) (Figure). Mask mandates were associated with a 0.7 percentage point decrease (p = 0.03) in daily COVID-19 death growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.0, 1.4, 1.6, and 1.9 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all). Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period."
So in other words, "wearing masks" prevented a maximum of 1.9% reduction in cases.
The study goes on to say "Masks are proven to drastically reduce cases"
Further, we should in theory be seeing a decrease in cases through a pandemic due to more people already exposed and immune. This is just an analysis of daily case rate over a year. Now we already know the issues with what was considered a case in that period. Multiple tests for a single person being multiple cases, large reports of false positive cases, etc.
How many people after the August NYT article about false positive rate just refused to go take the crap shoot of a "Postive" lottery after that period which could also be driving down case rate? We're going to worry about a 1.9% value when the test itself has an astronomical false positive rate?
it basically didn't control for ANY factors, you have no idea how many people were masking BEFORE the mandates, you have no idea if the counties involved ramped up testing, how they enforced their mandates, or what other covid measures they took in addition to this
sorry, you don't get to pull a situation with 1000's of contributing factors and make a claim that one of them is to blame. that's not science
The question here is the efficacy of mandates, not voluntary measures that people choose to take. Everyone is fine with someone deciding to wear a face mask. Any liberty-loving person wouldn't give a damn. The issue arises in whether making it illegal not to wear one has any significant efficacy, which the CDC admits doesn't. As for the other measures, their co-presence only casts further doubt on the causality of mask mandates in contributing to the already-insignificant change in numbers.
Good thing I realized this immediately and refused to wear a mask. Now imagine all the detrimental effects of mask wearing like bacterial lung infections and strep throat. Will be interested to see the studies on that vs. how ineffective the mask is.
From the study
"During March 1–December 31, 2020, state-issued mask mandates applied in 2,313 (73.6%) of the 3,142 U.S. counties. Mask mandates were associated with a 0.5 percentage point decrease (p = 0.02) in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.1, 1.5, 1.7, and 1.8 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all) (Table 1) (Figure). Mask mandates were associated with a 0.7 percentage point decrease (p = 0.03) in daily COVID-19 death growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.0, 1.4, 1.6, and 1.9 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all). Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period."
So in other words, "wearing masks" prevented a maximum of 1.9% reduction in cases.
The study goes on to say "Masks are proven to drastically reduce cases"
1.9% is "drastic"
Science is a political joke now
Further, we should in theory be seeing a decrease in cases through a pandemic due to more people already exposed and immune. This is just an analysis of daily case rate over a year. Now we already know the issues with what was considered a case in that period. Multiple tests for a single person being multiple cases, large reports of false positive cases, etc.
How many people after the August NYT article about false positive rate just refused to go take the crap shoot of a "Postive" lottery after that period which could also be driving down case rate? We're going to worry about a 1.9% value when the test itself has an astronomical false positive rate?
Has been for years. It's just out in the open now.
If masks worked, we'd see them worn at level-4 viral research facilities instead of the overpressure suits.
Study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm
so basically NOT science, then
it basically didn't control for ANY factors, you have no idea how many people were masking BEFORE the mandates, you have no idea if the counties involved ramped up testing, how they enforced their mandates, or what other covid measures they took in addition to this
sorry, you don't get to pull a situation with 1000's of contributing factors and make a claim that one of them is to blame. that's not science
The question here is the efficacy of mandates, not voluntary measures that people choose to take. Everyone is fine with someone deciding to wear a face mask. Any liberty-loving person wouldn't give a damn. The issue arises in whether making it illegal not to wear one has any significant efficacy, which the CDC admits doesn't. As for the other measures, their co-presence only casts further doubt on the causality of mask mandates in contributing to the already-insignificant change in numbers.
that's not what they said
Per the report:
"Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period."
The "reference period" being "March 1–December 31, 2020 (when) state-issued mask mandates applied in 2,313 (73.6%) of the 3,142 U.S. counties."
Please learn to rewd beyond the propaganistic headlines.
per the report
YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE MASKING BEFORE THE MANDATE, AND HOW MANY PEOPLE DID AFTER
without that data, making conclusions is not science. it's retardation
...well, it's the CDC, so...
if your underwear can't stop a fart, what makes these plebes think a mask will stop a virus?
Good thing I realized this immediately and refused to wear a mask. Now imagine all the detrimental effects of mask wearing like bacterial lung infections and strep throat. Will be interested to see the studies on that vs. how ineffective the mask is.
Fauci coauthored a paper in 2008 that claimed the majority of the deaths from the Spanish Flu were actually caused by people wearing masks.
Masks not only don't help, they are killing people.
This is the second time I've seen this referenced, can you provide a link?
"CDC Explains Why Masks are Mandated through 2024."
No shit sherlock.