- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
CDC admits face masks do little to prevent the spread of COVID-19
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:09 am
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:09 am
quote:
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. In a new study, the CDC found face masks had a negligible impact on coronavirus numbers that didn’t exceed statistical margins of error.
The study found that between March and December 2020, face mask orders reduced infection rates by 1.5 percent over the rolling periods of two months each. The masks were 0.5 percent effective in the first 20 days of the mandates and less than 2 percent effective after 100 days.
The CDC added it still recommends wearing face masks, although it admitted such mandates do not make any statistical difference. In the meantime, some states across the nation have slowly returned to normalcy by putting an end to mask mandates.
https://www.oann.com/cdc-face-masks-dont-prevent-covid-19-study-finds-masks-have-had-negligible-impact-on-coronavirus-numbers/
Uh oh.
This means a lot people look like clowns that escaped from Moron Bros Circus.
This post was edited on 3/13/21 at 6:11 am
23
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:11 am to xGeauxLSUx
It was all a show for 1 goal, to get rid of trump.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:13 am to xGeauxLSUx
It was never about efficacy it was about control.
Now that the orange man is gone they will slowly fess up to the sham.
Now that the orange man is gone they will slowly fess up to the sham.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:14 am to xGeauxLSUx
but they just said 3 year olds need to wear them
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:17 am to wryder1
quote:
It was all a show for 1 goal, to get rid of trump.
Right. And now, as anti-maskers are gaining strength and more states are going rogue with no-mask mandates, the government will take control back by leading the effort to do away with masks “in the name of science.”
All the blue cities are getting paid and pension funds have been refilled. Mission accomplished.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:20 am to xGeauxLSUx
quote:
CDC added it still recommends wearing face masks, although it admitted such mandates do not make any statistical difference
What is their position on the health benefit of ear candles?
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:20 am to xGeauxLSUx
Trust the science!
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:20 am to xGeauxLSUx
Now do the results for 2 masks.
That's real virtue signaling
That's real virtue signaling
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:20 am to ksayetiger
quote:
but they just said 3 year olds need to wear them
What's worse is, I think they made the 2+yr old rule AFTER they fessed up to this nonsense.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:33 am to tigers444
quote:
Trust the science!
That is the cult chant. Beneath it lies the truth: Believe Confirmation Bias!
Posted on 3/13/21 at 6:34 am to East Coast Band
quote:
Now do the results for 2 masks.
That's real virtue signaling
Then do 3 masks. Remember their claim: 2 masks=75%, 3 masks=90+%.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 7:42 am to xGeauxLSUx
That CDC report doesn't say what is being reported. There was an effect of mandates and closures that reached statistical significance, albeit small. And it was not significant at all time frames evaluated. I still think the cost/benefit doesn't favor mandates and closures.
Go ahead and down vote if you didn't bother to read the report. It is linked in the OANN story.
Go ahead and down vote if you didn't bother to read the report. It is linked in the OANN story.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 7:46 am to AndyCBR
quote:
Now that the orange man is gone they will slowly fess up to the sham.
No they won’t. I live in a purple suburb of Philly and the Dems that are in control here are no where near fessing up to anything. The mask wearing requirements here are worse today than ever with no end in sight.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 7:49 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
Go ahead and down vote if you didn't bother to read the report. It is linked in the OANN story.
Yeah, I’m no mask Nazi by any stretch, but when you look at the report from the study OANN’s article doesn’t really match the report.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 7:52 am to wryder1
quote:
It was all a show for 1 goal, to get rid of trump.
I’ve said this since day one. It was a physical reminder to voters that something had changed for the worse.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 7:56 am to AndyCBR
quote:
It was never about efficacy it was about control.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 8:11 am to Roll Tide Ravens
quote:
but when you look at the report from the study OANN’s article doesn’t really match the report.
Nothing they stated was factually incorrect. Spin is what its all about. One side spins that a less than 2% reduction is worth us all wearing mask for the rest of our lives and the other side spins that a less than 2% reduction is confirmation that masks are useless. Neither is right or wrong, it's all your interpretation. I'm guessing they could have found variables with a higher statistical effect than masks (i.e. fast food consumption) that would make the whole mask debacle look foolish if they tried.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 8:13 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
That CDC report doesn't say what is being reported. There was an effect of mandates and closures that reached statistical significance, albeit small. And it was not significant at all time frames evaluated. I still think the cost/benefit doesn't favor mandates and closures.
The report certainly didn’t match the headline.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 8:13 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
That CDC report doesn't say what is being reported.
It said that wearing masks reduced the spread. However, statistically, it was negligible. It would be like me bragging about “losing weight” when dropping from 500lbs to 499!
Yes...I lost weight, but does it really matter?
On the other hand, the data showed opening up restaurant’s showed an increase in the spread. Again, though, it was a statistical blip.
To use the “weight loss / gain” analogy, it would be like the new and improved 499lb me going to a restaurant, packing away the menu, and then feigning shock when I put on a couple of pounds.
Lastly, the “controls” for the restaurant setting are all over the place. Basically, there wasn’t one.
I read the study as a group of people that want to distance themselves from the economic, social, and psychological carnage that they have created. They know what was done in the name of “Science.” No offense but frick the Democrat’s at the CDC. They supportEd the draconian measures put in place by frickwads like this guy:
Let them own it.
Posted on 3/13/21 at 8:16 am to xGeauxLSUx
They work wonders for allergies
I been wearing mine all the time this past week and pollen hasn’t been an issue for me
I been wearing mine all the time this past week and pollen hasn’t been an issue for me
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News