Major Study Finds Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rates

Discussion in 'Coronavirus (COVID-19) News' started by Bluesguy, Nov 19, 2020.

  1. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    34,940
    Likes Received:
    11,046
    Trophy Points:
    113

    "There's no reason to be walking around with a mask" Dr. Anthony Fauci
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  2. (original)late

    (original)late Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you really think a dumbass troll is going to work on me?
     
  3. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    3,572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. I’ve read the study repeatedly. I’ve been watching the study since early summer. I’ve been waiting for it’s publication for months. I was aware of this:
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337541
    ...so have known the study limitations before publication. Nothing about this is a surprise to me. I recently posted a couple times on PF lamenting the delay in publication.

    Here’s one of those conversations clarifying I’m after truth, not bias confirmation.
    The above conversation is from October.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2020
    LoneStarGal likes this.
  4. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    34,940
    Likes Received:
    11,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Could you explain what makes that response a troll? You claim Fauci as your end all, be all source of knowledge, and the truth is that he's said a lot of things. So here is a quote of his. Sorry if it upsets you. As someone who can see both sides of an argument, I could have easily come up with a response to this, but it's interesting that you can't. For someone who shrieks SCIENCE, you seem much more a dogmatic zealot.
     
    Ddyad and sec like this.
  5. (original)late

    (original)late Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You actually did think that would work, thanks for the smile, it's been a dreary day.

    At the beginning, when there was a horrible shortage of PPE, they had to conserve them because it was a matter of life and death. Fauci doesn't say that now, hasn't for months. It's an excruciatingly dumb troll.

    Fauci is the top of the expertise pyramid, ain't just Fauci. There are a number of things I don't know. I don't know any of relevant specialties, and neither do you. I don't know why you ignore the obvious, that would be astonishing if I didn't see it many times a day in many issues. I don't know why you think you know what you are doing, when you don't know how policy and science intersect.

    I am the opposite of a zealot,which suggests you are projecting. A zealot is fanatic and uncompromising. I already told you, I don't have an opinion, whatever the CDC says is good with me.

    But I do know the places that are being stupid are paying a price that increases with their level of idiocy.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2020
  6. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The question was have you read the conclusion. This is the conclusion;

    "The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection."

    Notice the "by more than 50%" No one claimed they did reduce risk to the wearer by more than 50%! Their conclusion also States that masks do provide some self-protection (to a lesser degrees).
     
  7. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    3,572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If I’ve read the study I’ve read the conclusions. I also read the results section where the data is presented and it’s correctly stated the degree of protection is statistically insignificant. We know what that “lesser degree” is by reading the rest of the study. It’s statistically insignificant. We don’t claim masks reduce the spread of viruses using statistically insignificant data. Well, I don’t anyway.

    You do realize if you cherry pick one sentence from the discussion section without context from the results section, the “lesser degree“ could be anything from the 23% increase of the CI to 49.9% reduction? Well, what they are actually referring to is the statistically insignificant results. You are welcome to base your opinions on statistically insignificant data. I’m not willing to. That’s really the foundation of our disagreement.
     
  8. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The bit that you are failing to grasp is that the OP link is claiming that the study has concluded "masks don't reduce Covid infections" which is clearly not what the study concluded. For a start the study concluded that the mask does not significantly reduce risk to the wearer and, secondly and more importantly, the study did not conclude anything about the reduction of risk to others because "you" are wearing a mask. As can be seen the anti-maskers have jumped on this to further their anti-mask agenda
     
  9. ThirdTerm

    ThirdTerm Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,179
    Likes Received:
    405
    Trophy Points:
    83
    In the non-face mask group, 2.1 percent of participants were infected with new coronavirus, while 1.8 percent of participants in the face mask-wearing group were infected. The study thereby fails to confirm the expected halving of risk of infection for the wearer of the face mask, but the results could suggest a moderate level of protection of 15-20 percent, which is the actual conclusion of the Danish study (Bundgaard et al. 2020).

     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2020
  10. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    34,940
    Likes Received:
    11,046
    Trophy Points:
    113

    There you go! I finally got the real response from you!

    (I knew you could do it!)

    The truth is, Fauci said you don't need masks back in March because there was a shortage of PPE and he wanted to save them for the medical personnel. So you trust the guy that you admit lied to you months ago. That's dogma. That's being a zealot. That's not science.
     
  11. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
  12. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    3,572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I’m not failing to grasp anything. I clearly stated in the supplied quotes of mine from October (before publication) the study doesn’t address source efficacy. The study wasn’t designed to. That information is in the clinical trials link I supplied as well. I am not the one failing to grasp anything. I’m simply taking the study at face value and not reading into it preconceived notions as others are.

    As I said, I’ve no dog in this fight. That makes my adherence to facts unpopular with maskers and anti maskers at the same time. Both sides are completely off the rails in adherence to science at times. It looks like this study confirms that. Both sides claiming it concludes things it does not. As always, I will address the errors of the authoritarian side of the argument first. I have no problem if y’all want to believe this study concludes things it does not. My problem is with y’all wanting to call others murderers and advocating for authoritarian policy based on a misunderstanding of science.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2020
  13. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    39,959
    Likes Received:
    16,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, the study showed - yet again - that masks et al do not reduce the spread of viruses.

    "Comparing these results with the control group that was not tested and not isolated, nonparticipants actually contracted the virus at a slightly lower rate than those who were under an extreme regime.

    Conversely, extreme enforcement of NPIs plus more frequent testing and isolation was associated with a greater degree of infection."
    ISRAELI NATIONAL NEWS, Study: 'Even military-enforced extreme lockdown can’t stop COVID-19', New England Journal of Medicine: Extreme quarantine plus frequent testing, isolation among military recruits did nothing to stop COVID-19., Tags: Coronavirus Lockdown Military, By Mordechai Sones, Nov 16 , 2020.
    https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/291374
     
  14. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Instead of going around in circles, give your answer to these questions with your explanations:
    1: is this a major study?
    2: Does this study find masks don't reduce Covid infections?
     
  15. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    39,959
    Likes Received:
    16,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The insiders, like Fauci, have obviously always known that masks cannot reduce the spread of viruses.

    Graham DiFi maskless hug

     
    squidward likes this.
  16. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Every recruit wore a mask whether they were in the study or not. Every recruit carried out the same sterilisation and social distancing whether they were in the study group or not. I've already provided a link to the actual study
     
  17. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    39,959
    Likes Received:
    16,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Focus:

    "Upon arrival for recruit training, they spent two weeks in a strict, supervised group quarantine that required wearing masks and emphasized hand washing and social distancing as they began their initial military instruction, primarily outdoors."[/QUOTE]

    That was the point of the study which showed - yet again - that masks et al do not reduce the spread of viruses.

    "Comparing these results with the control group that was not tested and not isolated, nonparticipants actually contracted the virus at a slightly lower rate than those who were under an extreme regime.

    Conversely, extreme enforcement of NPIs plus more frequent testing and isolation was associated with a greater degree of infection."
    ISRAELI NATIONAL NEWS, Study: 'Even military-enforced extreme lockdown can’t stop COVID-19', New England Journal of Medicine: Extreme quarantine plus frequent testing, isolation among military recruits did nothing to stop COVID-19., Tags: Coronavirus Lockdown Military, By Mordechai Sones, Nov 16 , 2020.
    https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/291374
     
  18. Ddyad

    Ddyad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2015
    Messages:
    39,959
    Likes Received:
    16,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And Fauci knew what he was talking about.
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  19. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    3,572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1). It’s the ONLY study of its kind, so I’d say yes, it’s major. It’s not perfect in methodology but it’s the best we have.

    2). This study shows in the defined parameters and defined environment masks do not reduce incidence of infection in the wearer to a statistically significant level.

    It’s really that simple.
     
  20. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong. All recruits wore masks whether they were in the control group or in the study group. The study was not testing mask use, they were looking to see if strict quarantine helps reduce infections
    I already provided a link to the actual study
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2020
  21. truth and justice

    truth and justice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    18,592
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1: being the only one (it's not BTW) does not make a study, major. They even state that their study had many failures

    2. Where in the title of the link or in my question does it refer to the mask wearer?
     
  22. 557

    557 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    3,572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You should post the other studies. :) What makes a study “major”?

    Failures? Limitations, yes. The only “failure” was in data supporting the hypothesis.
    Your #2 question is irrelevant. The study was not designed to answer that question. I can’t answer such questions because they are nonsensical.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2020
    Ddyad likes this.
  23. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    9,595
    Likes Received:
    1,430
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Neither did you so.....

    How's about strong scientific evidence that "proves" smoking is healthy? I'm sure you got a bunch of those "strong scientific evidence" piles around.
     
  24. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    116,939
    Likes Received:
    23,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The conclusion was that of the study and already addressed what you repeated.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  25. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    36,678
    Likes Received:
    9,232
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Anyone with any smidge of scientific knowledge and critical thinking knows that one doesn't prove the null hypothesis. It is in effect until one produces enough strong scientific evidence to reject it.

    Say "Science" again, please.
     
    Ddyad likes this.

Share This Page