Major Study Finds Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rates <<MOD WARNING>>

Ask a nurse. Health care professionals wear masks, face shields, gowns, booties and gloves. Proximity to a lot of infected people on a daily basis has made HCP's 6% of the entire hospitalized cases, and most of those had high-risk complications such as obesity.


COVID-19–Associated Hospitalizations Among Health Care Personnel



https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6943e3.htm

 

And members of each group became infected with Covid-19. More infections occurred in the control group which followed strict protocols only enforceable in the military. I know exactly what the CHARM Data indicates. Masks don’t protect or prevent.

Are you going to answer my questions? Silence indicates that you understand that masks don’t prevent or protect.

 

Exactly. They use N-95 respirators plus closed system breathing apparatus in some cases. And still they become infected.

 

I’ve explained that quite clearly. I don’t care what non authoritarians believe. Believe whatever you want. But if you want to force others to do what you think they should you better at least have your ducks in a row. Y’all have ducks scattered from hell to breakfast with no sign of impending increased organization.

I can’t understand why you are upset about the OP using statistically insignificant data to base their opinion on when you are doing the exact same thing in reverse.

 

Masks are symbolic, not effective. It’s all about showing the democrat tribe you are down with them, or prepare to get attacked and shamed.

“Follow the science” they say, until the science disproves their narratives. Then, science is racist.

 

So? The Charm study was not studying masks. Everyone wore a mask so why don't you explain what conclusions about masks can be made from the charm study. Which bit don't you understand?

 

What have I done in reverse? I quoted the conclusion of the study's main author which is not as falsely reported in the OP. You on the other hand have given tacit approval of the OP.

If you can't understand that many are taking away from the OP that masks don't offer any protection to anyone then that is your choice. Meanwhile the states with lax mask guidelines are seeing higher rates of cases and deaths above those states with promoted mask guidelines.

 

The command-control elected office holders and unelected experts cannot tolerate the truth that there is nothing politically acceptable that will slow the spread. They implement policies and then claim that those policies did not work because not enough people followed them. Listen to Cuomo and DiBlasio.

 

The CHARM Study showed that masks do not protect or prevent.

 

And when you find both yourself and a study in compliance, let us know.

 

You are using statistically insignificant data to support your bias. Same as anti maskers.

There are literally thousands of posts on PF I don’t respond directly to. Not responding to them is not giving them tacit approval. LOL

As I said. Everyone can believe what they want, unless they want to force those beliefs on others. I haven’t seen the OP advocate for forcing anyone to remove their mask. Have you?

As far as deaths and masks, yes, at this point in time states like North Dakota are seeing more deaths and cases than other states requiring masks. But you have to remember, a few months ago it was the other way around. And states that have had mandates since April are seeing massive spikes in cases today as well. Because these states (ND, SD, etc.) are going through their first wave it’s expected their current death rates would be higher than states going through a second wave, even if infection rates are similar. Of course you probably won’t hear that on the news tonight...but most of the information I post isn’t common knowledge amongst progressives and modern liberals. Like your misconception about there being other studies like this one...you won’t learn stuff like this from your limited biased sources of information.

 

Compliance with what?

One never has to prove something has no effect. You have to prove it does.
And to think, I thought you were one of those enlightened "science" guys.
Geeze!

 

Science? Yes.
What you present? No. Reputation is important.

 

For being a science guy, you sure haven't demonstrated knowledge of basic scientific principles of investigation.

You disprove the null hypothesis.
That's how it works.


While you're at it, can you tell me where this virus was isolated, sequenced and grown in human cell lines, demonstrating infectivity? Can you tell us when and where the PCR probe complimentary base sequences were specifically and uniquely matched to this cultured, purified, viral genomic sequence?

And just maybe you can tell us the number of human, bacterial and viral genome sequences that share the complimentary base sequences to the SARS-COV-2 PCR probes?

Then maybe discuss the specificity of the PCR probes with 35 amplification cycles, and tell us how many cycles US labs are running. Also discuss whether we are using single, double or tripple PCR probe testing.

Thank you

 

~ Sad ... Perhaps there are scented masks ?

 

Facebook is suppressing distribution of this study through censorship, labeling it "false information".

 

I posted the Danish study and the CHARM study on Next Door in a political discussion sub group completely off the main feed. Both threads disappeared. It seems that anything that contradicts current public health policy regardless of the scientific validity of the studies is not allowed and immediately removed by the ND roving censors. The message: shut up and obey.

 

~ Yes the same here in Los Angeles. NextDoor policy is not to allow anything contradictory to government sanctioned "facts ". Posts and entire threads are deleted.

 

i repeatedly post that if you believe that medical and cloth masks protect and prevent the spread please act as if you aren't wearing a mask. Even that gets deleted.

 

Everyone in the study group and in the control group wore a mask so why don't you explain what conclusions about masks can be made from the charm study? You clearly don't know what you are talking about

 

The Spectator had to correct their article because it gave wrong information. They have now added the following statement:

"Due to the large number of people passing comment on the article on social media without reading it, we have updated the headline to emphasis that the study is about facemask wearers"

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/do-masks-stop-the-spread-of-covid-19-

So once again we have anti-maskers on Facebook sharing articles without bothering to check if it is correct. Just like in this thread

 

Straight out of the study:

"The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection."

Straight out of YOUR video, here are the words of the lead author of the study:
"The data was compatible with some degree of self protection"

You can dance around as much as you like but you are wrong, the study did NOT "find face masks don't reduce Covid-19 infection rates" and did conclude that face masks offer some degree of self-protection

 

Positive cases per million for first 19 states. from high to low:
North Dakota 95377
South Dakota 82591
Iowa 66730
Wisconsin 60915
Nebraska 58431
Utah 55265
Montana 52097
Illinois 51792
Idaho 51287
Tennessee 49856
Wyoming 48671
Mississippi 48109
Arkansas 48106
Minnesota 47903
Alabama 47419
Louisiana 47385
Kansas 46902
Missouri 45825
Rhode Island 45311

And also need to take into account that the majority of red states have a much lower population density and more favourable population distributions than blue states meaning that containment should have been easier

 

The virus is a 3rd party Independent; it doesn't care if you're Republican or Democrat.

Of the states you listed, 12 of them have mask mandates in place and 7 do not have mask mandates. That approaches 2:1.

If you want to talk Republican/Democrat states, all states without mask mandates have Republican governors, but not all those states are on the top 20 list. Also, there are 26 red states and 13 of them do have mask mandates in place. Not all Republicans are "anti-maskers".

Spreads often start with young adults and college kids who are going to socialize and "get close" no matter what rules are put in place.

 

Do you understand the term “statistically significant“? I’ve repeatedly stated the level of protection was statistically insignificant. You can dance around as much as you like, but that’s the facts. The calculated confidence interval shows that the “degree of self protection” could be as much as 23% increase in infection. When statistical significance is not met, it’s likely any variation in data is due to chance. You go with that. It’s your right. Just don’t go trying to force others to do things on bad data or data you think exists but doesn’t.