Posted on 08/25/2021 9:13:01 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I know trusting the CDC for COVID information is a bit like trusting a serial killer to take care of your kids, but even still, this seems a bit much.
In a completely expected revelation, the CDC has been caught covering up their own data that shows mask mandates produce no statistically significant difference in infection rates in schools. Instead of including that information in its released report and current guidance, the CDC shelved it.
Interesting… the CDC found statistically insignificant differences between schools that required kids to wear masks and those that didn't—but didn't include that finding in the summary of their report. @feeonline @miltimore79 https://t.co/Ox26ePTpJj
— Brad Polumbo 🇺🇸⚽️ 🏳️🌈 (@brad_polumbo) August 25, 2021
The study, which analyzed some 90,000 elementary students in 169 Georgia schools from November 16 to December 11, found that there was no statistically significant difference in schools that required students to wear masks compared to schools where masks were optional.
“The 21% lower incidence in schools that required mask use among students was not statistically significant compared with schools where mask use was optional,” the CDC said. “This finding might be attributed to higher effectiveness of masks among adults, who are at higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection but might also result from differences in mask-wearing behavior among students in schools with optional requirements.”
As New York magazine’s David Zweig noted, these findings, as well as other statistically insignificant preventive measures, “cast doubt on the impact of many of the most common mitigation measures in American schools.”
For accuracy’s sake, it needs to be noted that this study involved measuring the differences between schools that mandated masks and those that didn’t. What it didn’t do was actually test the direct efficacy of masks, though, there’s plenty of evidence on that front, as well, that they aren’t an effective mitigation measure. Regardless, whether mask mandates make a difference is the biggest issue at hand.
Even if one is a firm believer in masks despite the overwhelming amount of data showing no correlation between wearing them and community spread, it’s clear that children will never be able to wear them properly over a seven-hour day. And as efficacy drops and interactions increase, masks become essentially useless. Never mind that almost all children are wearing cloth or surgical masks, which studies have shown aren’t effective.
Yes, in some hypothetical scenario where an N95 mask is worn and sanitized perfectly to the highest standards, never being removed throughout the day, there is some statistically significant protection provided in a situation with repeated interactions. But that’s not the reality we live in, and policy should always be made within the realm of reality. The CDC has not been doing that. Rather, in my view, they’ve been making policy based on what will protect politicians. You see, if the CDC had included this data in their report and guidance, it would mean Joe Biden and Dr. Fauci would have to admit Ron DeSantis was right. We can’t have that, can we?
As Ron DeSantis said recently, this isn’t about science. Instead, it’s about politicians covering their own backsides by “doing something” even if the science says it’s not useful.
Gov. DeSantis: “Politicians wanna force you to cover your face as a way for them to cover their own asses.”
— Election Wizard (@ElectionWiz) August 25, 2021
Masks have become a crutch whereby all failures can be blamed on their supposed non-use despite mountains of contrary data that shows mask mandates don’t make a difference.
Japan continues to be the starkest example of this, though, there are many, many others.
Cases in Japan are now up 42,096% since a Forbes article on 6/22/20 said the high rate of mask wearing there was responsible for preventing COVID spread.
It’s a remarkable feat of media gaslighting that politicians and experts are still getting away with pretending masks matter.
pic.twitter.com/qAJ2qfiYF1— IM (@ianmSC) August 24, 2021
Look, if the data told me masks worked, I wouldn’t be for mandates because I’m a conservative. But I would at least promote them and follow any recommendations to wear them. Yet, I continue to see far too much data that shows masks and their mandating don’t correlate to spread. The fact that the CDC covered up information bolstering that fact regarding mask mandates for children in schools further destroys their already tattered credibility.
And while I’m sure the fact-checkers will go nuts on this article because it’s not repeating government orthodoxy, I’d ask whoever gets assigned to “check” this to look at the data themselves. Understand that just because the CDC says something does not make it true. Science should be based on objective, indisputable data, especially where policy decisions are concerned. That’s not happening, and it’s doing real damage to our ability to fight this pandemic.
How else can they scare kids?
Create a life time of mental issues and or ocd?
But the same study mentioned that KN95 and N95 masks were effective, something like 50% and 60%. So the point is that medical staff should wear KN95 and N95 masks in COVID wards but other than that, masks need to go.
I think they are the Center for Disseminating Chaos now.
“CDC Seems to Have Covered up Data Showing Masking Kids in Schools Is Pointless”
I swear, the movie Idiocracy was prophecy.
Remember the cdc and fda approved the tuskegee experiment for 40 years killing african americans in what they claimed were safe treatments for the common good.
They cover up and lie about everything. I want to see the cdc dissolved.
Or, the Chinese Deception Center.
Those better masks are only good as long as the
electrostatic charge lasts. The more moisture
a person breathes through them the worse the performance.
bttt
bookmark
Yup!
This study measures longer time periods.
Recharging and rejuvenation of decontaminated N95 masks
Physics of Fluids 32, 093304 (2020)
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0023940
I am more curious about HVAC filters than masks.
There is a mention of air filtration in this study.
21% is not statistically significant? Either that’s a typo or the comparison figure is left out, say, 20 percent. Overall, I have to believe that the numbers of Covid sufferers among children are small enough to render any statistic unreliable. Am I wrong about any of this?
That’s why 21% is not statistically significant. The number of cases was so small that one extra can cause a large percentage jump.
Remember the cdc and fda approved the tuskegee experiment for 40 years killing african americans in what they claimed were safe treatments for the common good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
