The CDC just published a claimed “research article” that makes yet another claim by retrospective observation that “masks work.”
This study examined whether implementation of statewide mask mandates was associated with COVID-19–associated hospitalization growth rates among different age groups in 10 sites participating in the COVID-19–Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) in states that issued statewide mask mandates during March 1–October 17, 2020. Regression analysis demonstrated that weekly hospitalization growth rates declined by 2.9 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3–5.5) among adults aged 40–64 years during the first 2 weeks after implementing statewide mask mandates. After mask mandates had been implemented for ≥3 weeks, hospitalization growth rates declined by 5.5 percentage points among persons aged 18–39 years (95% CI = 0.6–10.4) and those aged 40–64 years (95% CI = 0.8–10.2). Statewide mask mandates might be associated with reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission and might contribute to reductions in COVID-19 hospitalization growth rates, compared with growth rates during <4 weeks before implementation of the mandate and the implementation week.
Note those four words: Might be associated with.
Isn’t it interesting that:
Sites in states that did not have statewide mask mandates during March 1–October 17, 2020, were excluded from the analyses.
In other words they deliberately excluded comparisons against locations without mandates and, of course and most-importantly they cherry-picked the dates.
We all know what happened starting in the middle of October with Covid-19. Yet the masks work study was constricted to the times otherwise known as spring into the summer and early fall, exactly when viral infections tend to wane for other reasons which we have known for decades — specifically, people are outside more often and Vitamin D levels are higher due to outdoor sun exposure. In addition air conditioning systems indoors condense water vapor out of the air which in aerosol (and droplet) form carries viruses and harmlessly sends such condensed vapor and what it carries down the drain.
Of course come October the A/C units are turned off and heating plants turned on — and in places where fuel-fed heating plants are common humidifiers are typically in use as well which do the exact opposite — they evaporate water vapor into the atmosphere so as to make the air indoors more comfortable.
Had the study extended through Christmas it would have been impossible to reach the conclusion that “masks work” since everywhere, if you remember, we had a large spike that initiated right around the beginning of November which followed the latitude of the location, with higher latitudes getting it first. This is no surprise; it is exactly what we usually see with the flu and other respiratory viruses. In addition had the “study” not excluded places without mandates the data would have also been clear, as I pointed out back to the summer months here since we have counties in the same state and same general region some with mandates and some without and there was no statistical difference in per-100,000 person hospitalization rates between the two. Indeed, the correlation went the wrong way; there was a slightly (but not statistically significant) worse outcome in counties with mandates.
So now, having demonstrated conclusively that the CDC is in the present tense emitting knowingly-false “analysis”, otherwise known as propaganda, are you going to believe them when they tell you the vaccines for Covid-19 are safe and effective?
Remember, unlike a mask which you can remove and shove up the ass of those who try to force you to wear it, you cannot take back a decision to be jabbed in the arm; you’re stuck with the outcome, for good or bad.
Yeah, we’ll get to the vaccine situation…. let me just point out one thing: A vaccine that doesn’t produce sterilizing immunity is dangerous in the intermediate and longer term.
Let’s see if you can figure out why.