Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
CDC report admits that masks mandates decreased c***d spread by about one, measly percent.
Page 1 of 5 next> last>>
Mar 9, 2021 01:03:38   #
InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA
 
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many government reports, the CDC prays that readers don't go past the executive summary. If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy. They can put this out one day and then state we should probably be double-masking the next. We should f**g the CDC scientists as non-essential and park them at home in front of Netflix with their drink of choice. They'd be more relevant.


https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

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 C****-** 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 C****-** 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.

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 01:04:13   #
soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca
 
Love living on the edge don’t u hahahahaha

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 06:06:55   #
WNYShooter Loc: WNY
 
InfiniteISO wrote:
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many government reports, the CDC prays that readers don't go past the executive summary. If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy. They can put this out one day and then state we should probably be double-masking the next. We should f**g the CDC scientists as non-essential and park them at home in front of Netflix with their drink of choice. They'd be more relevant.


https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

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 C****-** 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 C****-** 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.
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many g... (show quote)


My Daughter posted something on Facebook the other day that I thought was hilarious. It was in reply some mask zealot who was touting some new mask she claimed completely blocks the v***s but allows you to breath normally and also still smell aromas around you.

My daughter asked "even farts?"

The girl replied, "Hahaha, unfortunately yes."

My daughter then replied, "well you best hope the person who farted doesn't have C***d, because that gas will also be carrying the v***s, and if you can smell the sulfur in that fart, realize that the C***d particle size is much much much smaller than the sulfur particles which got through your mask for you to smell."

The girl blocked her after that. LOL

Reply
 
 
Mar 9, 2021 06:27:59   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
InfiniteISO wrote:
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many government reports, the CDC prays that readers don't go past the executive summary. If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy. They can put this out one day and then state we should probably be double-masking the next. We should f**g the CDC scientists as non-essential and park them at home in front of Netflix with their drink of choice. They'd be more relevant.


https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

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 C****-** 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 C****-** 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.
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many g... (show quote)



Reply
Mar 9, 2021 06:32:37   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
1% of 500,000 lives = 5000 lives saved if approaching the math in a simple way.
BUT
If Mask wearing was mandatory from the start then the effect would be a compound interest type of thing.
If out of 100 people in January 2020, then only 99 were infected and spread C***D to others. A tree of infections from that 1 person would not exist. It is like compound interest on your charge card... adds up fast.

New Zealand imposed mask-wearing early and this has a low per capita infection and death toll. New Zealand men, of course, are used to health protection since they always wear velcro gloves when having sex with sheep. Reference Woody Allen's movie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzr5Cubph9Y
New Zealand's infection rate:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/c****-**-c****av***s-interactive-how-does-new-zealand-compare/J54QRHM553QAKBENCGFHFMYY2Q/

A simple experiment, with tonic water in your mouth, sneeze 3 feet away from a black styrofoam board [dollar tree store] then on the backside do the same but with a mask. In a dark room shine a UV light [$15 100 bulb UV flashlight eBay or Amazon] and you will see the difference in the particulate spray.

WNYShooter, your farts will be filtered by several layers of fabric. V***ses are much larger than the VOC molecules of indole and scatole. Please note that particulate, semi-solid fecal material, is responsible for the brown stain on your underwater that you put on fresh after your previous weekly Saturday night bath.

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 07:03:49   #
WNYShooter Loc: WNY
 
dpullum wrote:


A simple experiment, with tonic water in your mouth, sneeze 3 feet away from a black styrofoam board [dollar tree store] then on the backside do the same but with a mask. In a dark room shine a UV light [$15 100 bulb UV flashlight eBay or Amazon] and you will see the difference in the particulate spray.


Particulate spray. yes, but not the aerosol form which also emits from your breath, not to mention the wet mask itself as you breath out through it. Again, regardless of how many layers of filter or fabric, if you can smell anything at all, the C***d particle is much smaller than that particle you just smelled. Besides that, your eyes are just as susceptible to catching the particles.

Japan is one of the most mask compliant populations in the world, yet they spiked regardless:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1096478/japan-confirmed-cases-of-c****av***s-by-state-of-health/

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 07:56:26   #
JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.
 
WNYShooter wrote:
Particulate spray. yes, but not the aerosol form which also emits from your breath, not to mention the wet mask itself as you breath out through it. Again, regardless of how many layers of filter or fabric, if you can smell anything at all, the C***d particle is much smaller than that particle you just smelled. Besides that, your eyes are just as susceptible to catching the particles.

Japan is one of the most mask compliant populations in the world, yet they spiked regardless:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1096478/japan-confirmed-cases-of-c****av***s-by-state-of-health/
Particulate spray. yes, but not the aerosol form w... (show quote)


While you might "smell" particles, you smell predominantly GAS MOLECULES which are much smaller than v***s particles.

Reply
 
 
Mar 9, 2021 08:30:49   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
InfiniteISO wrote:
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many government reports, the CDC prays that readers don't go past the executive summary. If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy. They can put this out one day and then state we should probably be double-masking the next. We should f**g the CDC scientists as non-essential and park them at home in front of Netflix with their drink of choice. They'd be more relevant.


https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

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 C****-** 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 C****-** 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.
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many g... (show quote)


"If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy." ?????

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 08:39:04   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
WNYShooter wrote:
Particulate spray. yes, but not the aerosol form which also emits from your breath, not to mention the wet mask itself as you breath out through it. Again, regardless of how many layers of filter or fabric, if you can smell anything at all, the C***d particle is much smaller than that particle you just smelled. Besides that, your eyes are just as susceptible to catching the particles.

Japan is one of the most mask compliant populations in the world, yet they spiked regardless:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1096478/japan-confirmed-cases-of-c****av***s-by-state-of-health/
Particulate spray. yes, but not the aerosol form w... (show quote)


When I was fit tested for an N95 mask at work, they had me put on the mask, then they put a hood over my head and sprayed banana smell into the hood. If I had been able to smell it, it would have been called a bad fit.

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 09:03:31   #
DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods
 
thom w wrote:
When I was fit tested for an N95 mask at work, they had me put on the mask, then they put a hood over my head and sprayed banana smell into the hood. If I had been able to smell it, it would have been called a bad fit.



Somewhere in my long distant past I used that same type test mask testing

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 09:44:41   #
boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander
 
InfiniteISO wrote:
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many government reports, the CDC prays that readers don't go past the executive summary. If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy. They can put this out one day and then state we should probably be double-masking the next. We should f**g the CDC scientists as non-essential and park them at home in front of Netflix with their drink of choice. They'd be more relevant.


https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

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 C****-** 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 C****-** 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.
Here it is, straight from their site. Like many g... (show quote)

There has NEVER been a single scientific double blind study verifing the effoicacy of masks.. NOT ONE. That kind of study, the only kind that has any merit, may not even be possible. Untill such a study is conducted nno one can say , withy any scientific validity , that masks work. But they still might say that a mask my not work but it wont hurt to wear one

Reply
 
 
Mar 9, 2021 10:15:04   #
soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca
 
dpullum wrote:
1% of 500,000 lives = 5000 lives saved if approaching the math in a simple way.
BUT
If Mask wearing was mandatory from the start then the effect would be a compound interest type of thing.
If out of 100 people in January 2020, then only 99 were infected and spread C***D to others. A tree of infections from that 1 person would not exist. It is like compound interest on your charge card... adds up fast.

New Zealand imposed mask-wearing early and this has a low per capita infection and death toll. New Zealand men, of course, are used to health protection since they always wear velcro gloves when having sex with sheep. Reference Woody Allen's movie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzr5Cubph9Y
New Zealand's infection rate:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/c****-**-c****av***s-interactive-how-does-new-zealand-compare/J54QRHM553QAKBENCGFHFMYY2Q/

A simple experiment, with tonic water in your mouth, sneeze 3 feet away from a black styrofoam board [dollar tree store] then on the backside do the same but with a mask. In a dark room shine a UV light [$15 100 bulb UV flashlight eBay or Amazon] and you will see the difference in the particulate spray.

WNYShooter, your farts will be filtered by several layers of fabric. V***ses are much larger than the VOC molecules of indole and scatole. Please note that particulate, semi-solid fecal material, is responsible for the brown stain on your underwater that you put on fresh after your previous weekly Saturday night bath.
1% of 500,000 lives = 5000 lives saved if approach... (show quote)


We are all going to die its just a matter of when. Sheeple

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 10:42:30   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
slocumeddie wrote:
You are obviously an expert on fecal material.....but I'd prefer that you keep your s**t to yourself.....!!!


Indeed you are highly articulate after retirement I taught the learning disadvantaged... you reminded me of that.

"I'd prefer that you keep your s**t to yourself" My how expressive, such maturity.

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 11:57:12   #
InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA
 
thom w wrote:
"If you really dig into their numbers the only collusion can be that mask mandates were crap, are still crap, and have been a waste of time and energy." ?????


Damn spell checker, LOL

Reply
Mar 9, 2021 11:59:53   #
InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA
 
thom w wrote:
When I was fit tested for an N95 mask at work, they had me put on the mask, then they put a hood over my head and sprayed banana smell into the hood. If I had been able to smell it, it would have been called a bad fit.


N95, dust type masks are not fit tested this way. Only masks with a rubber surround and cartridges. I go through this every year.

The mask pictured is today's issue at work, it can not be fit tested.



Reply
Page 1 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.