Mask Mandates Had Zero Effect in Florida or Nationwide

[dukkha]

Florida, for example, most counties have so far bravely refused to implement mask mandates while others, usually in high population centers, have done so. Justin Hart and the team at Rational Ground (follow them on Twitter here - it’s worth it) just released a comprehensive data analysis of masked vs non-masked counties in the state.
A total of 22 of 67 counties in the state have implemented a mask order at some point during the period of May 1 through December 15. It may not sound like many, but these include almost all of Florida’s largest metro areas. To be more than fair, if an area added a mask order at some point during the outbreak, the study’s authors gave a 14 day period to allow time for cases to begin subsiding. “Cases were summed for both mandate and non-mandate jurisdictions and adjusted per 100,000 people for days the mandates were or were not in effect,” wrote the authors, describing the methodology used.

If masks did even close to as advertised, one would expect to see the counties that went maskless to be absolute dumpster fires next to the counties that implemented mandates, right?
At the very least, the numbers should favor the masked areas by more than a percentage point or two. So, how did it go? Yep, it was the Mask Cult’s worse nightmare:

“When counties DID have a mandate in effect, there were 667,239 cases over 3,137 days with an average of 23 cases per 100,000 per day. When counties DID NOT have a countywide order, there were 438,687 cases over 12,139 days with an average of 22 cases per 100,000 per day.”

In other words, counties with mask-mandates in place actually did WORSE than those that refused to implement them. (Yeah, color me shocked.) The authors even accounted for population density in their analysis, suggesting that it didn’t have an impact on the numbers because four of the 12 most populous counties in Florida never had a countywide order. “When the eight DID have an order in effect, there were 64 cases per 1,000. In periods 11 of 12 DID NOT have one, there were 40,” they wrote.

“But that’s just Florida,” you say. “They’re weirdos anyway. Surely masks have worked in the rest of the country.” Well, I’m glad you asked! The good folks at Rational Ground went on to compare national numbers, pitting the states that resisted the urge to impose a statewide mask mandate against those that masked up. How did those compare?

“When states DID have a mandate in effect, there were 9,605,256 cases over 5,907 total days and averaged 27 cases per 100,000 per day. When states DID NOT have a statewide order there were 5,781,716 cases over 5,772 total days averaging 17 cases per 100,000 people per day.”

So there you have it, incontrovertible data evidence that mask mandates do little to nothing to stop or even slightly curb the spread of COVID-19. If masks were the answer, wouldn’t you expect to see a drop in cases not long after mask mandates are implemented? At the very least, wouldn’t you expect to see cases level off and STAY leveled off? What you would NOT expect would be what has actually happened, for cases to spike as they have done since November seemingly all across the country, regardless of whether or not a mandatory masking policy was in place.

Further, wouldn’t you also expect states and areas that MASKED HARRDERRR than anyone else, states like California that have the ‘bold leadership’ to insist the plebes under their control mask up outside on hiking trails and sitting alone in parks, to have the lowest case counts of all? Just look at the latest per capita numbers there compared to Florida and tell me with a straight face that mask mandates ‘work.’ As Dave Rubin adeptly pointed out earlier this month, Florida’s numbers “should be ten times higher” than California’s. I mean, nobody is asking for masks to work perfectly, but hell, shouldn’t we expect SOME performance?

Numbers and data like this get down to the brass tacks. We can pit our doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists against their doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists on the actual science behind whether forcing people to put a moist, bacteria & virus-laden piece of cloth over the holes through which they breathe actually works to contain a virus that’s infinitesimally smaller than its threads (and yes, there are plenty of doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists on Team Reality too, and a bunch of them are on this must-follow Twitter list!), but if mask-mandates aren’t actually WORKING to curb the spread, why do we have them in place?

It’s complete and utter nonsense, of course. You know it, I know it, and the powers-that-be likely know it too. So why do they insist on continuing the charade? Whatever it is, it has NOTHING to do with either public health or real science.
https://townhall.com/columnists/scot...the-l-n2581879

[Darth Omar]

Key concept: “as advertised”.

If masks worked *as advertised* there should be significant discrepancies in the data in masks vs non-masks. Frankly, I’m skeptical that much of anything moves the COVID needle much in either direction. Lockdowns only delay peaks—they don’t prevent them. Social distancing probably helps a bit but that depends on how prevalent aerosol transmission goes on.

Quarantine forces people to stay inside and unless they live alone they just infect the people they live with and produce intrafamilial infections.

[Hoosier Daddy]

Florida, for example, most counties have so far bravely refused to implement mask mandates while others, usually in high population centers, have done so. Justin Hart and the team at Rational Ground (follow them on Twitter here - it’s worth it) just released a comprehensive data analysis of masked vs non-masked counties in the state.
A total of 22 of 67 counties in the state have implemented a mask order at some point during the period of May 1 through December 15. It may not sound like many, but these include almost all of Florida’s largest metro areas. To be more than fair, if an area added a mask order at some point during the outbreak, the study’s authors gave a 14 day period to allow time for cases to begin subsiding. “Cases were summed for both mandate and non-mandate jurisdictions and adjusted per 100,000 people for days the mandates were or were not in effect,” wrote the authors, describing the methodology used.

If masks did even close to as advertised, one would expect to see the counties that went maskless to be absolute dumpster fires next to the counties that implemented mandates, right?
At the very least, the numbers should favor the masked areas by more than a percentage point or two. So, how did it go? Yep, it was the Mask Cult’s worse nightmare:

“When counties DID have a mandate in effect, there were 667,239 cases over 3,137 days with an average of 23 cases per 100,000 per day. When counties DID NOT have a countywide order, there were 438,687 cases over 12,139 days with an average of 22 cases per 100,000 per day.”

In other words, counties with mask-mandates in place actually did WORSE than those that refused to implement them. (Yeah, color me shocked.) The authors even accounted for population density in their analysis, suggesting that it didn’t have an impact on the numbers because four of the 12 most populous counties in Florida never had a countywide order. “When the eight DID have an order in effect, there were 64 cases per 1,000. In periods 11 of 12 DID NOT have one, there were 40,” they wrote.

“But that’s just Florida,” you say. “They’re weirdos anyway. Surely masks have worked in the rest of the country.” Well, I’m glad you asked! The good folks at Rational Ground went on to compare national numbers, pitting the states that resisted the urge to impose a statewide mask mandate against those that masked up. How did those compare?

“When states DID have a mandate in effect, there were 9,605,256 cases over 5,907 total days and averaged 27 cases per 100,000 per day. When states DID NOT have a statewide order there were 5,781,716 cases over 5,772 total days averaging 17 cases per 100,000 people per day.”

So there you have it, incontrovertible data evidence that mask mandates do little to nothing to stop or even slightly curb the spread of COVID-19. If masks were the answer, wouldn’t you expect to see a drop in cases not long after mask mandates are implemented? At the very least, wouldn’t you expect to see cases level off and STAY leveled off? What you would NOT expect would be what has actually happened, for cases to spike as they have done since November seemingly all across the country, regardless of whether or not a mandatory masking policy was in place.

Further, wouldn’t you also expect states and areas that MASKED HARRDERRR than anyone else, states like California that have the ‘bold leadership’ to insist the plebes under their control mask up outside on hiking trails and sitting alone in parks, to have the lowest case counts of all? Just look at the latest per capita numbers there compared to Florida and tell me with a straight face that mask mandates ‘work.’ As Dave Rubin adeptly pointed out earlier this month, Florida’s numbers “should be ten times higher” than California’s. I mean, nobody is asking for masks to work perfectly, but hell, shouldn’t we expect SOME performance?

Numbers and data like this get down to the brass tacks. We can pit our doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists against their doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists on the actual science behind whether forcing people to put a moist, bacteria & virus-laden piece of cloth over the holes through which they breathe actually works to contain a virus that’s infinitesimally smaller than its threads (and yes, there are plenty of doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists on Team Reality too, and a bunch of them are on this must-follow Twitter list!), but if mask-mandates aren’t actually WORKING to curb the spread, why do we have them in place?

It’s complete and utter nonsense, of course. You know it, I know it, and the powers-that-be likely know it too. So why do they insist on continuing the charade? Whatever it is, it has NOTHING to do with either public health or real science.
https://townhall.com/columnists/scot...the-l-n2581879

how can even a trump voter believe an airborne virus, hundreds of times larger than the air we breathe or the carbon dioxide we exhale, is not stopped almost completely if everybody wears masks? have you worn a mask? have you walked around briskly for awhile and found it makes it a little harder to breathe? because the MASK IS INHIBITING THE FLOW OF AIR COMING INTO YOUR PIEHOLE AND NOSE, BOZO. get it? and the virus is many many times larger....try to understand basic logic and physics....now think about how easy it would be for you to blow out a candle that was 3' away...not put on a mask and try it...no fucking way. maybe not even 1'...and the virus is many many many times larger than the carbon dioxide you exhale!! and you think masks on both the inhaler and the inhalee would not shut down almost all virus particles? WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID? if these anecdotal instances of masked counties or unmasked do not show a big difference, there is something wrong with the anecdotal "evidence." people can still meet up outside public bars or places where a mask is mandated, or in places where they are not. you cannot be so stupid to believe masks do not work.

[Darth Omar]

how can even a trump voter believe an airborne virus, hundreds of times larger than the air we breathe or the carbon dioxide we exhale, is not stopped almost completely if everybody wears masks? have you worn a mask? have you walked around briskly for awhile and found it makes it a little harder to breathe? because the MASK IS INHIBITING THE FLOW OF AIR COMING INTO YOUR PIEHOLE AND NOSE, BOZO. get it? and the virus is many many times larger....try to understand basic logic and physics....now think about how easy it would be for you to blow out a candle that was 3' away...not put on a mask and try it...no fucking way. maybe not even 1'...and the virus is many many many times larger than the carbon dioxide you exhale!! and you think masks on both the inhaler and the inhalee would not shut down almost all virus particles? WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID? if these anecdotal instances of masked counties or unmasked do not show a big difference, there is something wrong with the anecdotal "evidence." people can still meet up outside public bars or places where a mask is mandated, or in places where they are not. you cannot be so stupid to believe masks do not work.

Well, why aren’t they working lol?

[Into the Night]

how can even a trump voter believe an airborne virus, hundreds of times larger than the air we breathe or the carbon dioxide we exhale, is not stopped almost completely if everybody wears masks?

Masks do not stop anything less than 3 microns. The covid19 virus is .2 microns. Masks won't stop it.

have you worn a mask?

Only to satisfy 'house rules' in stores. I do not allow masks to be worn on my property, and I do not wear them except in a store that requires it as a house rule.

have you walked around briskly for awhile and found it makes it a little harder to breathe? because the MASK IS INHIBITING THE FLOW OF AIR COMING INTO YOUR PIEHOLE AND NOSE, BOZO. get it?

Masks do inhibit breathing some, because the air moving them is diffused by the fibers in the mask. Masks do not stop either oxygen nor carbon dioxide at all. If mask stopped or restricted oxygen or carbon dioxide, you would suffocate.

and the virus is many many times larger.

No mask will stop it.

...try to understand basic logic and physics...

You are denying both. You are also denying engineering. The N95 specification is an engineering spec.

now think about how easy it would be for you to blow out a candle that was 3' away...

Exhaling is diffused. That means blowing is simply diffused and can't be concentrated enough to blow out a candle any further than a few inches away. It is tough to near impossible to blow out a candle three feet away without a mask at all.

not put on a mask and try it...no fucking way. maybe not even 1'...

Yes. It's possible if the candle is close enough. The mask does not stop oxygen or carbon dioxide. What is does is essentially prevent you from shaping your breath into a concentrated cone of air by using your lips.

and the virus is many many many times larger than the carbon dioxide you exhale!!

Irrelevant.

and you think masks on both the inhaler and the inhalee would not shut down almost all virus particles?

Masks do not stop oxygen, carbon dioxide, nor viruses at all.

WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID?

It is YOU that is denying engineering and physics here.

if these anecdotal instances of masked counties or unmasked do not show a big difference, there is something wrong with the anecdotal "evidence."

Irrelevant. The N95 spec is really the only reference necessary.

people can still meet up outside public bars or places where a mask is mandated, or in places where they are not. you cannot be so stupid to believe masks do not work.

Masks do not work. They do not stop a virus or any gas.
6 feet does not stop a virus.
Closing businesses does not stop a virus and is unconstitutional.
Governor edicts are unconstitutional. Governors are not kings.

[Rune]

WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID?

This is what we all keep asking.
Why does this confirmed idiot think normal people fall for the bullshit only intended for the very most gullible of society?

[BartenderElite]

Why do you guys ignore studies like those in TN?

Masks work. They actually reduce transmission by up to 50%.

What a weird debate.

[Rune]

Well, why aren’t they working lol?

How did Japan utterly defeat Covid?

[Charoite]

Well of course we get this bullshit from Townhall and Dookie. I'm a Michigander and before things were implemented we were one of the worst in the nation. Bless or governor for not being a blowhard or giving in to their pressure and threats. That woman had more cajones than all you whiners put together. Maybe that's why so many are butthurt, they got emasculated.

[Hoosier Daddy]

Masks do not stop anything less than 3 microns. The covid19 virus is .2 microns. Masks won't stop it.

Only to satisfy 'house rules' in stores. I do not allow masks to be worn on my property, and I do not wear them except in a store that requires it as a house rule.

Masks do inhibit breathing some, because the air moving them is diffused by the fibers in the mask. Masks do not stop either oxygen nor carbon dioxide at all. If mask stopped or restricted oxygen or carbon dioxide, you would suffocate.

No mask will stop it.

You are denying both. You are also denying engineering. The N95 specification is an engineering spec.

Exhaling is diffused. That means blowing is simply diffused and can't be concentrated enough to blow out a candle any further than a few inches away. It is tough to near impossible to blow out a candle three feet away without a mask at all.

Yes. It's possible if the candle is close enough. The mask does not stop oxygen or carbon dioxide. What is does is essentially prevent you from shaping your breath into a concentrated cone of air by using your lips.

Irrelevant.

Masks do not stop oxygen, carbon dioxide, nor viruses at all.

It is YOU that is denying engineering and physics here.

Irrelevant. The N95 spec is really the only reference necessary.


Masks do not work. They do not stop a virus or any gas.
6 feet does not stop a virus.
Closing businesses does not stop a virus and is unconstitutional.
Governor edicts are unconstitutional. Governors are not kings.

bullshit. good god. would doctors and nurses and experts all be wrong and somehow you be right? are you nuts? if a mask inhibits air from coming in, and inhibits carbon dioxide from going out...all in huge quantities both in and out compared to any tiny amount of virus that might be in the atmosphere, and air is 1000 times smaller and carbon dioxide is 500 times smaller than the virus....even a clown has to see unless both masked people are about an inch apart and breathing the hell out of each other's fumes, there can be almost no exchange. are you trying to be stupid? do you think the virus is as common as air in the atmosphere? seriously? even when an infected person is breathing he probably only emits relatively few virus particles, and they die if they do not find a host. do you understand viruses at all?

Coronavirus particles are 120 nanometers, oxygen is 0.120 nanometers and carbon dioxide is 0.232 nanometers.

Infectious disease physician breaks down coronavirus mask ...

[Darth Omar]

bullshit. good god. would doctors and nurses and experts all be wrong and somehow you be right? are you nuts? if a mask inhibits air from coming in, and inhibits carbon dioxide from going out...all in huge quantities both in and out compared to any tiny amount of virus that might be in the atmosphere, and air is 1000 times smaller and carbon dioxide is 500 times smaller than the virus....even a clown has to see unless both masked people are about an inch apart and breathing the hell out of each other's fumes, there can be almost no exchange. are you trying to be stupid? do you think the virus is as common as air in the atmosphere? seriously? even when an infected person is breathing he probably only emits relatively few virus particles, and they die if they do not find a host. do you understand viruses at all?

Coronavirus particles are 120 nanometers, oxygen is 0.120 nanometers and carbon dioxide is 0.232 nanometers.

Infectious disease physician breaks down coronavirus mask ...

Anything that has to be measured in nanometers can go right through a surgical mask like it’s not even there lol.

Surgical masks aren’t approved PPE in critical care areas—for a reason. They don’t work, regardless of what the approved experts are saying. The FDA says they *may* reduce transmission.

Mays, mights, and maybes aren’t very sciencey.

[Hoosier Daddy]

Anything that has to be measured in nanometers can go right through a surgical mask like it’s not even there lol.

Surgical masks aren’t approved PPE in critical care areas—for a reason. They don’t work, regardless of what the approved experts are saying. The FDA says they *may* reduce transmission.

Mays, mights, and maybes aren’t very sciencey.

they do work, idiot. or doctors and experts would not wear them....see how trump and his coterie of dumbass anti-science freaks did not wear masks? see how many of them got infected- from trump and his wife and kid to white house aides who were close to trump to the idiots that showed up at his maskless pep rallies and "events." now how many prominent democrats have been infected, the ones who wear masks?

[Trumpet]

Florida, for example, most counties have so far bravely refused to implement mask mandates while others, usually in high population centers, have done so. Justin Hart and the team at Rational Ground (follow them on Twitter here - it’s worth it) just released a comprehensive data analysis of masked vs non-masked counties in the state.
A total of 22 of 67 counties in the state have implemented a mask order at some point during the period of May 1 through December 15. It may not sound like many, but these include almost all of Florida’s largest metro areas. To be more than fair, if an area added a mask order at some point during the outbreak, the study’s authors gave a 14 day period to allow time for cases to begin subsiding. “Cases were summed for both mandate and non-mandate jurisdictions and adjusted per 100,000 people for days the mandates were or were not in effect,” wrote the authors, describing the methodology used.

If masks did even close to as advertised, one would expect to see the counties that went maskless to be absolute dumpster fires next to the counties that implemented mandates, right?
At the very least, the numbers should favor the masked areas by more than a percentage point or two. So, how did it go? Yep, it was the Mask Cult’s worse nightmare:

“When counties DID have a mandate in effect, there were 667,239 cases over 3,137 days with an average of 23 cases per 100,000 per day. When counties DID NOT have a countywide order, there were 438,687 cases over 12,139 days with an average of 22 cases per 100,000 per day.”

In other words, counties with mask-mandates in place actually did WORSE than those that refused to implement them. (Yeah, color me shocked.) The authors even accounted for population density in their analysis, suggesting that it didn’t have an impact on the numbers because four of the 12 most populous counties in Florida never had a countywide order. “When the eight DID have an order in effect, there were 64 cases per 1,000. In periods 11 of 12 DID NOT have one, there were 40,” they wrote.

“But that’s just Florida,” you say. “They’re weirdos anyway. Surely masks have worked in the rest of the country.” Well, I’m glad you asked! The good folks at Rational Ground went on to compare national numbers, pitting the states that resisted the urge to impose a statewide mask mandate against those that masked up. How did those compare?

“When states DID have a mandate in effect, there were 9,605,256 cases over 5,907 total days and averaged 27 cases per 100,000 per day. When states DID NOT have a statewide order there were 5,781,716 cases over 5,772 total days averaging 17 cases per 100,000 people per day.”

So there you have it, incontrovertible data evidence that mask mandates do little to nothing to stop or even slightly curb the spread of COVID-19. If masks were the answer, wouldn’t you expect to see a drop in cases not long after mask mandates are implemented? At the very least, wouldn’t you expect to see cases level off and STAY leveled off? What you would NOT expect would be what has actually happened, for cases to spike as they have done since November seemingly all across the country, regardless of whether or not a mandatory masking policy was in place.

Further, wouldn’t you also expect states and areas that MASKED HARRDERRR than anyone else, states like California that have the ‘bold leadership’ to insist the plebes under their control mask up outside on hiking trails and sitting alone in parks, to have the lowest case counts of all? Just look at the latest per capita numbers there compared to Florida and tell me with a straight face that mask mandates ‘work.’ As Dave Rubin adeptly pointed out earlier this month, Florida’s numbers “should be ten times higher” than California’s. I mean, nobody is asking for masks to work perfectly, but hell, shouldn’t we expect SOME performance?

Numbers and data like this get down to the brass tacks. We can pit our doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists against their doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists on the actual science behind whether forcing people to put a moist, bacteria & virus-laden piece of cloth over the holes through which they breathe actually works to contain a virus that’s infinitesimally smaller than its threads (and yes, there are plenty of doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists on Team Reality too, and a bunch of them are on this must-follow Twitter list!), but if mask-mandates aren’t actually WORKING to curb the spread, why do we have them in place?

It’s complete and utter nonsense, of course. You know it, I know it, and the powers-that-be likely know it too. So why do they insist on continuing the charade? Whatever it is, it has NOTHING to do with either public health or real science.
https://townhall.com/columnists/scot...the-l-n2581879

Town Hall, is well known for being a far right propaganda site, which factually questionable. All that you're doing here is parroting dis-information.

[Darth Omar]

they do work, idiot. or doctors and experts would not wear them....see how trump and his coterie of dumbass anti-science freaks did not wear masks? see how many of them got infected- from trump and his wife and kid to white house aides who were close to trump to the idiots that showed up at his maskless pep rallies and "events." now how many prominent democrats have been infected, the ones who wear masks?

How many *actual* experts do you see caring for COVID patients in surgical masks lol?

There’s a reason you don’t see them wearing them.

[Hoosier Daddy]

How many *actual* experts do you see caring for COVID patients in surgical masks lol?

There’s a reason you don’t see them wearing them.

i give up. you win. don't wear a mask. whatever. good luck.