Paper has a misleading conclusion. The paper makes a conclusion that the study shows wearing a mask reduces COVID19 transmission, but the data shows the impact is insignificant.
The paper has a bad setup. They assume that when the mask mandate was in place, everyone wore masks. When there wasn't a mask mandate, everyone stopped wearing masks. In my opinion, the mask mandate didn't make a difference because states won't enforce them and people have their rights to choose whether they want to wear a mask or not. As such, a mask mandate didn't mean people started wearing masks. And no mask mandate also means that more cautious people didn't stop wearing masks.
I read the article on their website AND they interpret the data “as showing the masks and closing restaurants as successfully slowing the spread” while admitting that the variance between with/without & open/closed was INSIGNIFICANT! Fricken spin while the data shows the truth! I sent the article with data to my brainwashed family who work with research data and couched it as helping but by a slight margin. I think once they see the data, they’ll recognize the discrepancy. Just trying to break through their programming- even if it’s slight.
First they admit 94% of 'Covid' deaths were fake and now this.
I'm so fucking sick of this garbage.
Flu season is over at the end of March
Wow. That study is:
Paper has a misleading conclusion. The paper makes a conclusion that the study shows wearing a mask reduces COVID19 transmission, but the data shows the impact is insignificant.
The paper has a bad setup. They assume that when the mask mandate was in place, everyone wore masks. When there wasn't a mask mandate, everyone stopped wearing masks. In my opinion, the mask mandate didn't make a difference because states won't enforce them and people have their rights to choose whether they want to wear a mask or not. As such, a mask mandate didn't mean people started wearing masks. And no mask mandate also means that more cautious people didn't stop wearing masks.
This paper is crap and misleading at best.
Thank you! I agree 100%! Fricken spin but the data to those who know can see!
"iF iT sAvEs 1 LiFe!"
<gets an abortion>
Leftists sicken me.
Source CDC article?
Would be good to save/archive it before they modify it or retract it.
Thanks!
I read the article on their website AND they interpret the data “as showing the masks and closing restaurants as successfully slowing the spread” while admitting that the variance between with/without & open/closed was INSIGNIFICANT! Fricken spin while the data shows the truth! I sent the article with data to my brainwashed family who work with research data and couched it as helping but by a slight margin. I think once they see the data, they’ll recognize the discrepancy. Just trying to break through their programming- even if it’s slight.